Disposed

Smt. Jayamma, v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Dec 2025WP/2547/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners, claiming rights through a 1920 sale deed, challenged an endorsement entitling disputed land as 'Sarkari Pada'. The court directed the authorities to examine records and delete the entry if unjustified, disposing of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent authorities to examine all records, pass appropriate orders correlating the sale deed dated 21.04.1920, and delete the word 'Pada' from the revenue records if no records exist

Smt. Jayamma, Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:53130 WP No. 2547 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 2547 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. JAYAMMA, W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS

¶10

SRI VARUNAGOWDA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,

¶11

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT SRIRAMANAHALLI, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK - 560 064.

¶12

Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

(BY SRI. KARTHIK V., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

… PETITIONERS

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

THE TAHSILDAR GRADE 2 YELAHANKA TALUK,

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:53130 WP No. 2547 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560 064.

¶22

… RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA)

¶24

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT IN NO. RK/CR/1132/2024-25 DATED 31.12.2024 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, GRADE-2 YELAHANKA TALUK, YELAHANKA A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REMOVE 'PHADA' ENTRY IN THE RTC RELATING TO LAND MEASURING 4 ACRES 04 GUNTAS IN SY.NO. 30 OF SRIRAMANAHALLI HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK EXPEDITIOUSLY AND ETC.

¶25

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The present petition has been filed seeking to set

¶28

aside the endorsement dated 31.12.2024 issued by the Tahsildar.

¶29

Perusal of the endorsement at Annexure-G

¶30

would indicate that the property in Sy. No. 30 of Sriramanahalli, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Yelahanka Taluk, was stated to have entry of 'Sarkari Pada'. Aggrieved by such entry, petitioners are stated to have filed an application

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:53130 WP No. 2547 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

seeking copy of the order and records relating to such entry. In terms of the endorsement at Annexure-G and in reply to the petitioners' request, it is stated that there are no records available with the authorities regarding categorizing of lands in Sriramanahalli Village as Sarkari Pada, more particularly as regards Sy. No. 30 of the said village.

¶34

Petitioners submit that the said land has been purchased by one Channigappa by a sale deed dated 21.04.1920 by a registered instrument. It is further submitted that the petitioners herein have derived right as legal representatives of Channigappa, who is the purchaser to the sale deed dated 21.04.1920. It is submitted that the said sale deed finds an entry in the encumbrance certificate as well. It is further submitted that in the same survey number, as regards land other than what is in possession of the petitioners, entries have been made in the names of private parties as is evidenced from the RTC.

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:53130 WP No. 2547 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Learned Additional Government Advocate upon

¶38

instructions submits that there are no records available regarding treating of portion of Sy. No. 30 as 'Sarkari Pada', and that is the stand taken in the endorsement as well.

¶39

It must be noticed that the petitioners are claiming rights through a sale deed. It is submitted that they are the legal representatives of late Channigappa, who was the purchaser of property through a registered sale deed. If that is so and the land measuring an extent of 4 acres 4 guntas is shown as 'Sarkari Pada', the respondent - Authorities to examine the request of the petitioners to delete the word "Pada" and pass appropriate orders. If no records are available as is stated in the endorsement, the respondent - Authorities to examine all records and pass orders for entry in revenue records of those who are entitled pursuant to rights that are claimed under the registered sale deed dated 21.04.1920. It is

¶40

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:53130 WP No. 2547 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

made clear that the observations made herein are for

¶44

consideration as per law.

¶45

6. Accordingly petition is disposed of .

¶46

Sd/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

¶47

Smt. Jayamma, v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Jayamma, v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.Shashikumar G Vs the Special Tahasildar

Munikrishnappa Dead by Lrs Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Chandra Shekar v Vs Principal Secretary

Sri Marigowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri M Munianjanappa Vs State Government

Smt. Zarina Taj Vs the Deputy Commissioner