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

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

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:8626-DB WA No. 203 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 203 OF 2025 (SCST)

BETWEEN:

MUNISWAMAPPA

S/O. LATE. DODDAKADARAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/A CHAKARASANAHALLI, NARASAPURA HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK-563101 KOLAR DISTRICT.

Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KRISHNAPPA S/O MOTAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/A CHAKARASANAHALLI, NARASAPURA HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK-563101 KOLAR DISTRICT.

KADIRAPPA S/ O MUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS, R/A CHAKARASANAHALLI, NARASAPURA HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK-563101 KOLAR DISTRICT.

…APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. BABU, ADVOCATE)

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:8626-DB WA No. 203 of 2025

HC-KAR

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR-563101.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOLAR SUB-DIVISION, KOLAR DISTRICT-563101.

THE TAHSILDAHAR, KOLAR SUB-DIVISION, KOLAR DISTRICT-563101

B PRATHIBHA D/O LATE. N THIMMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/A No.1095, 12TH MAIN ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU-560038

T BEENA D/O LATE. N THIMMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/A No.1095, 12TH MAIN ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU-560038.

T VIJAYALAKSHMI D/O LATE. N THIMMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/A No. 1095, 12TH MAIN ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU-560038.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:8626-DB WA No. 203 of 2025

HC-KAR

T GEETHA D/O LATE. N THIMMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/A No.1095, 12TH MAIN ROAD, INDIRANAGAR,

BENGALURU-560038.

T MAMTHA D/O LATE. N THIMMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/A No.1095, 12TH MAIN ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU-560038.

T NEETHA D/O LATE. N THIMMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/A No.1095, 12TH MAIN ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU-560038.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.S. HARISH, GA FOR R1 TO R4 SRI. VISWANATHA T.N, ADVOCATE FOR R9)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS, SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER DATED 19.12.2024 IN W.P No. 11434/2021 (SC-ST) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HONBLE COURT AND ALLOW THE SAID WRIT PETITION FILED BY HIM i.e., WP No. 11434/2021 AND ETC.

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

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:8626-DB WA No. 203 of 2025

HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

For the reasons stated in the application ‒ I.A.No.3/2025, the same is allowed. The order dated 25.06.2025 is recalled and the appeal is restored to file.

The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 19.12.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ petition No.11434 of 2021 (SC/ST). The respondents had preferred the said writ petition assailing the order dated 23.06.2016 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Kolar Sub Division, Kolar, restoring the subject lands in favour of the original grantee/his heirs. The respondents also impugned an order dated 16.01.2019 passed by the Deputy Commissioner whereby the appeal against the order dated 23.06.2016 passed by the Assistant Commissioner was rejected.

The land measuring to the extent of 2 acres and 35 quntas comprising in Survey No.144 (old Survey No.153) situated at

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:8626-DB WA No. 203 of 2025

HC-KAR

Chakrasanahali Village, Narasapur Hobli, Kolar Taluk, was granted to one Muniswami [the original grantee] on 10.04.1937. The heirs to the original grantee sold the subject land to one H.Thippareddy by a registered sale deed dated 23.06.1988. Sri H. Thippareddy further sold the subject property to Sri N. Thimmaready, the father of the respondent Nos.5 to 10 under a registered sale deed dated 21.06.1989.

The appellants who claimed to be the heirs of the original grantee instituted proceedings for restoration of the subject property and annulment of the sale deeds dated 23.06.1988 and 21.06.1989 before the Assistant Commissioner. The said proceedings culminated in an order dated 23.06.2018. The Assistant Commissioner accepted that the subject land was granted to the original grantee with the attendant condition that the same not be encumbered. The said order also records that the original records were not available. However, the Assistant Commissioner concluded that the original grantee belonged to a depressed class and as per the rules of allotment, subject land could not be alienated.

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:8626-DB WA No. 203 of 2025

HC-KAR

The respondents preferred an appeal against the decision of the Assistant Commissioner before the Deputy Commissioner, which was dismissed by an order dated 16.01.2019. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondents preferred a writ petition, which was allowed in terms of the impugned order.

The learned Single Judge held that the proceedings for restoration of the land were highly belated and such proceedings, instituted after an inordinate delay, could not be entertained. Concededly, the proceedings for restoration of the land were initiated more than eighteen years after the subject land had been first alienated. The Co-ordinate Benches of this Court have in a number of cases including Smt. M.Manjula Vs. The Deputy Commissioner and others: 2024:KHC:51015-DB and Smt. Gouramma @ Gangamma Vs. The Deputy Commissioner and others2024:KHC-D:10666-DB, held that the resumption proceeding after an inordinate delay cannot be entertained. The proceedings instituted in the present case are also be barred by latches.

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:8626-DB WA No. 203 of 2025

HC-KAR

In view of the above, we find no infirmity with the impugned order allowing the writ petition. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Pending application is also disposed of.

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

Vmb List No.: 2 Sl No.: 20