Laxmi Vs Technical — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Laxmi Vs Technical — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed; impugned endorsement dated 19.02.2014 issued by respondent No.1 (Annexure-L) quashed; revenue authorities directed to effect necessary entries in the revenue records strictly in accordance with the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court in O.S.No.4 of 2013 (which has attained finality), on production of a certified copy, within four weeks from the date of production by the petitioner.

Issue for consideration

Whether the endorsement dated 19.02.2014 issued by respondent No.1 declining to entertain the petitioner's appeal on account of the pendency of civil suit O.S.No.4 of 2013 remained sustainable once the civil suit stood decreed and the adjudication attained finality. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the conclusion of the civil proceedings and the finality attained thereto, the very basis on which respondent No.1 declined to entertain the petitioner's appeal no longer subsists.

Ratio / Principle

Once the civil dispute stood conclusively resolved, respondent No.1 is required to consider the appeal on its own merits, in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

The impugned endorsement dated 19.02.2014 requires quashment.ratio¶44
The revenue authorities shall effect necessary entries in the revenue records strictly in accordance with the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court (which has attained finality), on production of a certified copy of the judgment and decree, within four weeks from the date of such production by the petitioner.ratio¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (KLR-RES) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India filed by Smt. Laxmi challenging (i) the endorsement dated 19.02.2014 (Annexure-L) issued by respondent No.1, the Technical Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner, Koppal, in file BHU NI KO/TAM/APPEAL/26/202314/11312, declining to entertain her appeal because civil suit O.S.No.4 of 2013 was pending, and (ii) the consequential Form No.10 (Annexure-G) issued by respondent No.2 for land bearing Sy.No.1 measuring 15 acres 2 guntas at Rajoor village, Yelburga taluk, Koppal district. The Court recorded that O.S.No.4 of 2013, instituted by the petitioner seeking declaration and injunction, was decreed on 26.07.2018, and the respondents' appeal R.A.No.80 of 2022 was dismissed, confirming the Trial Court's decree, so the civil adjudication had attained finality. Holding: with the civil dispute conclusively resolved, the basis for refusing to entertain the appeal no longer subsisted and respondent No.1 was required to consider the appeal on its own merits in accordance with law; the endorsement dated 19.02.2014 was accordingly quashed, and the revenue authorities were directed to effect necessary entries in the revenue records strictly in accordance with the Civil Court's judgment and decree, on production of a certified copy, within four weeks of such production. Writ petition allowed.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:298 WP No. 104019 of 2014

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 104019 OF 2014 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT. LAXMI W/O. PRAKASH GADDAD (D/O. BALAPPA NAGOJI), AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. ADOOR, TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. A.S.PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

TECHNICAL ASSISTANT TO THE OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & EX-OFFICIO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL.

Digitally signed
by GIRIJA A.BYAHATTI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
GIRIJA A. KARNATAKA
BYAHATTI DHARWADBENCH
Date:
2026.01.20
15:20:06
+0530

THE TAHASILDAR, YELBURGA TALUK, YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.

THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, NADA KARYALAYA, KUKANOOR, TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.

THE TALUKA SURVEYOR, TAHASILDAR OFFICE, YELBURGA, TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.

SHRI. NINGAPPA S/O. LATE MUDUKAPPA NAGOJI, AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. ADOOR, TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:298 WP No. 104019 of 2014

HC-KAR

SHRI. FAKKIRAPPA S/O. SOMAPPA CHALAGERI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHALAGERI, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL.

SHRI. RAMESH S/O. HANUMAPPA KURI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HALAKERI, TQ: RON, DIST: GADAG.

SHRI. TUKARAM S/O. SHIVAPPA BAJANTRI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RAJOOR, TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SIR. DINESH M.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R5 AND R8; SRI. H.N.GULARADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R6 AND R7)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 19.02.2014 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN BHU NI KO/TAM/APPEAL/26/202314/11312 AS PER ANNEXURE-L; QUASH THE IMPUGNED FORM NO.10 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN FILE NO.RK/801/GSC/505095/13-14-YM/KR/393/12-13 PERTAINING TO THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.1 MEASURING 15 ACRES 2 GUNTAS SITUATED AT RAJOOR VILLAGE OF YELBURGA TALUK, DIST: KOPPAL AS PER ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.

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

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:298 WP No. 104019 of 2014

HC-KAR

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has approached this Court calling in question the endorsement dated 19.02.2014 issued by respondent No.1 (Annexure-L), and the consequential Form No.10 issued by respondent No.2 (Annexure-G), in respect of land bearing Sy.No.1, measuring 15 Acres 2 guntas situated at Rajoor Village, Yelburga Taluk, Koppal.

The impugned endorsement (Annexure-L) came to be issued by respondent No.1 - the Technical Assistant to the office of the Deputy Commissioner, on the ground that the appeal preferred by the petitioner could not be entertained owing to the pendency of the civil suit in O.S.No.4 of 2013.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for respondents No.1 to 4, and learned counsel for other respondents. Perused the records.

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:298 WP No. 104019 of 2014

HC-KAR

It is not in dispute that, O.S.No.4 of 2013, instituted

by the petitioner against the respondents seeking declaration and injunction, came to be decreed by judgment and decree dated 26.07.2018. It is further undisputed that the appeal preferred by the respondents in R.A.No.80 of 2022 was dismissed, thereby confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in O.S. No.4 of 2013. Consequently, the civil adjudication between the parties has attained finality.

In view of the conclusion of the civil proceedings and

the finality attained thereto, the very basis on which respondent No.1 declined to entertain the appeal no longer subsists. Once the civil dispute stood conclusively resolved, respondent No.1 is required to consider on its own merits, in accordance with law.

In that view of the matter, the impugned endorsement dated 19.02.2014 requires quashment.

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:298 WP No. 104019 of 2014

HC-KAR

ORDER

i. The writ petition is allowed .

ii. The impugned endorsement dated 19.02.2014 issued by respondent No.1 (Annexure-L) is hereby quashed.

iii. The revenue authorities shall affect necessary entries in the revenue records strictly in accordance with the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court, which has attained finality, on production of certified copy of the judgment and decree, within a period of four weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of judgment and decree by the petitioner.

Sd/JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA

gab Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61