Dismissed¶45

J Sarala Devi v. the Commissioner

Writ Appeal (LB-RES) – E-Katha

Karnataka HC11 Feb 2026WA/1342/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court Division Bench dismisses writ appeal against refusal to direct issuance of E-Katha for property No.1328/1741, B.M.Road, Vivekanandanagar, Ramanagara; E-Katha denied while preliminary decree in partition suit O.S. No.73/2011 is challenged in pending RFA No.34/2021; appellants J Sarala Devi and M/s Janatha Saw Mill; respondents Commissioner, Ramanagara City Municipal Council and K. Manmohan Prasad; appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act; no interference; appeal dismissed; interim applications disposed.

What did the court decide?

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the impugned judgment and order dated 16.06.2025 of the learned Single Judge, no interference is called for; the writ appeal is without merit and substance and stands dismissed. ¶45

J Sarala Devi Vs the Commissioner — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:8323-DB WA No. 1342 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO. 1342 OF 2025 (LB-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

J SARALA DEVI

¶11

W/O. LATE K.JAYACHANDRA PRASAD

¶12

PROPRIETORIX OF

¶13

M/S JANATHA SAW MILL, A GED ABOUT 68 YEARS, NO.1328/1741, B-M ROAD, VIVEKANANDANAGAR, RAMANAGARA-562 159.

¶14

Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

M/S.JANATHA SAW MILL

¶16

NO.1328/1741, B-M ROAD, VIVEKANANDANAGAR, RAMANAGARA-562 159.

¶17

REPRESENTED BY SMT.J.SARALA DEVI W/O. LATE K.JAYACHANDRA PRASAD AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS.

¶18

…APPELLANTS

¶19

(BY SRI. NAGARAJA RAO K S., ADVOCATE)

¶20

AND:

¶21

THE COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL (CMC), OLD B-M ROAD, RAMANAGARA-562159.

¶22

¶23

NC: 2026:KHC:8323-DB WA No. 1342 of 2025

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

K. MANMOHAN PRASAD

¶26

S/O LATE J.KRISHNAMURTHY PRASAD NO.782, BALEPET, RAMANAGARA TOWN RAMANAGARA-562 159.

¶27

…RESPONDENTS

¶28

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16/06/2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.7637/2025 BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL, ETC.

¶29

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶31

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶32

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶33

The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 16.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in the Writ Petition No.7637/2025 (LB-RES), filed by the petitioners/ appellants herein.

¶34

The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court for the sake of convenience.

¶35

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:8323-DB WA No. 1342 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

The petitioners had approached the writ Court in the writ petition for a direction to issue E-Katha on

¶39

the Official Online portal in respect of the property bearing No.1328/1741, B.M.Road, Vivekanandanagar, Ramanagara. It appears that in the partition suit in O.S. No.73/2011, a preliminary decree was passed declaring the rights of the impleading applicant and the petitioners. In terms of the said decree, the impleading applicant has been declared entitled to a share in the joint family property. The judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.73/2011 is subject matter of challenge in RFA No.34/2021. The said RFA has not yet been finally decided. When the suit proceedings are still at large inasmuch as the appeal is pending, the learned Single Judge has disposed the writ petition on the ground that issuing a E-Katha exclusively in favour of the petitioner

¶40

would negate the judgment and decree, which has not yet been finalised. The learned Single Judge has also observed that the parties would be at liberty to submit an

¶41

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:8323-DB WA No. 1342 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

appropriate representation before the competent authority after disposal of RFA No.34/2021 pending before this Court.

¶45

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the impugned judgment and order dated 16.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge, we are of the considered view that no interference is called for. Therefore, the writ appeal being without merit and substance stands dismissed .

¶46

In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending interim applications, if any, also stand disposed.

¶47

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶48

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶49

NG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10 CT : SN

J Sarala Devi v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J Sarala Devi v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sadhashiva Bhat Vs Suresh Bhat

R Neelamma Vs the Registrar

Rekha R Vs Royal Sundaram Alliance Ins. Co. Ltd.

Girish Kumar T M Vs Deputy Commissioner

LIC of India Vs K M Gurushivakumar

Sri M S Chinnappa Vs the Deupty Commissioner Court