Dismissed¶42

Sri Narayanaswamy v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Mar 2026WA/1788/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ appeal dismissed by Division Bench of Karnataka High Court; regularization of unauthorized occupation; Form No.53 application dated 23.12.1998; Karnataka Land Revenue Act 1964; Tahsildar Hosakote endorsement/eviction notice dated 08.09.2025; original 1998 Application Register verified, petitioner's name not found; 27-year delay in approaching the Writ Court; Section 4 Karnataka High Court Act; W.P. No.28149/2025 (KLR-RES); Bengaluru Rural District.

What did the court decide?

The Division Bench found no error in the impugned order of the learned Single Judge, which was passed after verifying the original records, and dismissed the writ appeal. ¶42

Sri Narayanaswamy Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:13018-DB WA No. 1788 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶8

AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 1788 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI. NARAYANASWAMY, S/O MUNIYAPPA @ D. ABBAYYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, RESIDING AT MELINAPETE, HOSAKOTE TOWN - 562 114, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. DIVYATHEJ A.B., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BEERASANDRA, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.

¶18

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION, DODDABALLAPURA - 561 203, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:13018-DB WA No. 1788 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THE TAHSILDAR, HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSAKOTE TOWN - 562 114, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)

¶25

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTIO 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT WRIT APPEAL BY SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED: 24.09.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.28149/2025(KLR-RES) AND ETC.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

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

¶30

The present Writ Appeal has been filed impugning

¶31

the order dated 24.09.2025 passed by the Writ Court in Writ Petition No.28149/2025, filed by the appellant.

¶32

The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the learned Single Judge for the sake of convenience.

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:13018-DB WA No. 1788 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

The petitioners had filed the Writ Petition

¶36

impugning the endorsement/ Eviction notice dated 08.09.2025 issued by the fourth respondent Tahsildar, Hosakote and sought Writ of Mandamus to consider the application dated 23.12.1998 filed by the petitioner in Form No.53 under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The Tahsildar in the impugned endorsement states that the petitioner had not filed any application - Form No.53 in the year 1998 and the petitioner's claim for regularization of unauthorized occupation could not be considered as there is no corresponding entry in the Register maintained for making entries with respect to filing of the Form No.53. In fact, the learned Single Judge directed the Additional Government Advocate to secure and place before the Court the original Application Register of the year 1998.

¶37

The learned Single Judge examined the register as produced by the Additional Government Advocate and did not find the name of the petitioner entered in the Register.

¶38

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:13018-DB WA No. 1788 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

We may also take note of another fact that

¶41

according to the petitioner, he filed the application in 1998, but he came to the Court only in the year 2025 that is after a lapse of 27 years, seeking regularization of the

¶42

land. We find no error in the impugned order, in as much as the learned Single Judge has passed the impugned order after verifying the original records and thus, we dismiss this appeal.

¶43

In view of disposal of the appeals, pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of, as they do not survive for consideration.

¶44

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶45

Sd/(T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

¶46

TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17

Sri Narayanaswamy v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Narayanaswamy v. the State of Karnataka

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

Sri M C Kuppuswamy Vs Oriental Insurance Company

Vistara Ventures Vs Aroon Saab

Sri. Laxman Shriyan Vs Sri. Sanjeeva Alias Shivappa Gowda

Sri Chowdappa Vs the State of Karnataka

The General Manager Vs the President

Mrs Vinodamma Since Dead Represented by Her L.R Sri. Suresh.S Vs the Managing Director