Disposed¶33

N Chidananda v. Channapatna City Municipal Council

Karnataka HC30 Jan 2025WP/33400/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

khata transfer; entry of names in Khata register; Khatedar; mutation; representation; Channapatna City Municipal Council; Ramanagara District; Municipal Commissioner; gift deed dated 04.04.2006; death of mother 15.02.2016; grand-mother Jayamma; succession; direction to consider and pass orders on merits; two months; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; writ petition disposed of; no opinion on merits; Karnataka High Court Bengaluru; N S Sanjay Gowda; WP No. 33400 of 2024; LB-RES; NC: 2025:KHC:4397

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioners' representations/request and pass appropriate order on merits in accordance with law within two months from receipt of a copy of the order, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim. ¶33

N Chidananda Vs Channapatna City Municipal Council — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should issue to the respondent–Channapatna City Municipal Council to consider and pass orders on the petitioners' representations dated 15.06.2016, 27.11.2023 and 22.01.2024 (Annexures E, E1, E2) seeking entry of their names in the Khata register on succession to the property.

¶25

Court's answer

The respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioners and pass appropriate order on merits in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶31

Key takeaways

Nothing said in the order shall be construed as rendering any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioners.obiter¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 33400 of 2024 (LB-RES), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (N S Sanjay Gowda, J.), decided 30-01-2025 [NC: 2025:KHC:4397]. Filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners (N Chidananda and Divya) sought a direction to the Channapatna City Municipal Council, Ramanagara District, to consider their representations dated 15.06.2016, 27.11.2023 and 22.01.2024 (Annexures E, E1, E2) for entry of their names in the Khata register. Their claim rested on succession: the property originally stood in the name of their grand-mother Jayamma, the registered Khatedar, who conveyed it to the petitioners' mother under a registered gift deed dated 04.04.2006; the mother died on 15.02.2016, whereupon the petitioners succeeded to the property. The Court directed the respondent to consider the request and pass appropriate order on merits in accordance with law within two months from receipt of a copy of the order, expressly stating that nothing in the order shall be construed as an opinion on the merits of the claim. The writ petition was disposed of.

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:4397 WP No. 33400 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 33400 OF 2024 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

N CHIDANANDA S/O. SRI. NAGAMANGALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

¶9

DIVYA D/O. SRI. NAGAMANGALIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

¶10

BOTH THE PETITIONERS ARE RESIDING AT. NO. 1561/A, KUVEMPU NAGAR, NEXT TO KOTE ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE, CHANNAPATNA TOWN - 562 120.

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKARA K., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL CHANNAPATNA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562159 REP BY MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI. GANGADHARAPPA A V., ADVOCATE)

¶18

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT TO PASS ORDERS / DISPOSE OF REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS AS FOUND AT ANNEXURE-E, E1 AND E2 DATED:15.06.2016, 27.11.2023 AND 22.01.2024 RESPECTIVELY, ETC.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:4397 WP No. 33400 of 2024

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

The case of the petitioners is for issuance of a

¶25

direction to the respondent to consider their representations dated 15.06.2016, 27.11.2023 and 22.01.2024, the copies of which are produced at Annexures ‘E’, ‘E1’ and ‘E2’.

¶26

By the said annexures, the petitioners contend that the property in question was initially standing in the name of their grand-mother—Jayamma and her name was also registered as the Khatedar.

¶27

It is stated that their grand-mother had conveyed the said property to their mother under a registered gift deed dated 04.04.2006 and their mother had passed away on 15.02.2016. As a consequence of which, they had succeeded to the property and

¶28

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:4397 WP No. 33400 of 2024

¶30

therefore, their names were required to be entered in the Khata register.

¶31

In my view, since it is contended that the property was standing in the name of the petitioners’ grandmother and by virtue of the execution of the gift deed in favour of the petitioners’ mother and on her subsequent death, the petitioners’ had inherited the same, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent to consider the request of the petitioners and pass appropriate order on merits in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶32

It is needless to state that nothing said in this order shall be construed as rendering any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioners.

¶33

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of .

¶34

Sd/(N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE

¶35

RK,List No.: 1 Sl No.: 78

N Chidananda v. Channapatna City Municipal Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N Chidananda v. Channapatna City Municipal Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri R Kemparaju Vs the Regional Commissioner

Zuri Hospitality Private Limited Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri K Murli Reddy Vs the Principal Secretary

Sri Nagesh K M Vs the Secretary

Sri Ravi S Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Umashankar G S Vs Mysuru Urban Development Authority