Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Smt Gurramma Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Home
Karnataka HC
2026
Smt Gurramma Vs the State of KarnatakaSmt Gurramma v. the State of Karnataka

Disposed¶38

Smt Gurramma v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Jun 2026WP/18245/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru (NC: 2026:KHC:29942; HC-KAR); Writ Petition No. 18245 of 2026 (KLR-RR/SUR); Gurramma v. State of Karnataka & others; Judge: E.S. Indiresh; decided 18-06-2026. Keywords: mutation of name in revenue records; RTC; Sy.No.10/P79 (old Sy.No.10/32); 2 acres 05 guntas; Sonnayakanapura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore Urban District; Article 226 mandamus; representation dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure-B); decree in O.S. No. 489/2011; order in R.P. No. 460/2023; Tahsildar Anekal; Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru Urban; disposed of with time-bound direction to consider representation; no adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.4 (Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure-B) within one month from receipt of copy of the order; no opinion expressed on merits.

Why is it important?

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, respondent No.4 (Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk) is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure-B) within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. ¶37

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.4 (Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure-B) within one month from receipt of copy of the order; no opinion expressed on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.4 (Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk) should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.12.2023 and enter/mutate her name in the revenue records for the suit land in terms of the decree in O.S.No.489/2011 and the order in R.P.No.460/2023.

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, respondent No.4 (Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk) is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure-B) within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU (E.S. Indiresh, J.) — W.P. No. 18245 of 2026 (KLR-RR/SUR), decided 18 June 2026: The petitioner sought a direction under Article 226 to the revenue authorities to enter her name in the revenue records for Sy.No.10/P79 (old Sy.No.10/32), measuring 2 acres 05 guntas, at Sonnayakanapura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Anekal Taluk, in terms of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.489/2011 and the order passed by respondent No.2 in R.P.No.460/2023. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court directed respondent No.4 (Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk) to consider her representation dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure-B) within one month from receipt of a copy of the order, and disposed of the writ petition.

A

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:29942 WP No. 18245 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

WRIT PETITION NO. 18245 OF 2026 (KLR-RR/SUR)

BETWEEN:

SMT. GURRAMMA W/O SEENAPPA D/O LATE YELLAMMA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS R/AT CHINNAYYANAPALYA INDLAWADI ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU 562106.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING

BENGALURU 560 001.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT KANDAYA BHAVAN, K G ROAD BENGALURU 560 009.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:29942 WP No. 18245 of 2026

HC-KAR

KANDAYA BHAVAN, K G ROAD BENGALURU 560 009.

THE TAHSILDAR ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-560064.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA., AGA)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING CONSIDER THE 4 (THE TAHSILDAR) TO THE RESPONDENT NO. REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 08-12-2023 (ANNEXURE-B) AND CONSEQUENTLY MUTATE THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN THE IN RESPECT OF SY.NO.10/P79 (OLD REVENUE RECORDS/RTC SY.NO.10/32) MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 2 ACRES AND 05 GUNTAS SITUATED AT SONNANAYAKANAPURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, IN TERMS OF THE DECREE IN O.S. NO. 489/2011 AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

ORAL ORDER

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:29942 WP No. 18245 of 2026

HC-KAR

In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a

direction on respondent-authorities to enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue records pertaining to land in question in terms of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.489/2011 and the order passed by the respondent No.2 in R.P.No.460/2023 (Annexure-C).

In that view of the matter, without expressing

any opinion on the merits of the case, respondent No.4 is directed to consider the representation dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure-B), within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

KLY

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether respondent No.4 (Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk) should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.12.2023 and enter/mutate her name in the revenue records for the suit land in terms of the decree in O.S.No.489/2011 and the order in R.P.No.460/2023.¶35
The court held
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, respondent No.4 (Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk) is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure-B) within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶37

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶26

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Civil suit O.S.No.489/2011 resulted in a judgment and decree; the writ relief is sought in terms of that decree.¶35
Prior proceeding
Respondent No.2 (Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District) passed an order in R.P.No.460/2023 (Annexure-C); the writ relief is sought in terms of that order.¶35
Prior proceeding
Petitioner submitted a representation dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure-B) to respondent No.4 (Tahsildar) seeking mutation of her name; the Court directs its consideration.¶37

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
SMT. GURRAMMA W/O SEENAPPA D/O LATE YELLAMMA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS R/AT CHINNAYYANAPALYA INDLAWADI ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU 562106.¶10
Srinivas V.
respondent
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING BENGALURU 560 001.¶15
B.P. Radha
respondent
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT KANDAYA BHAVAN, K G ROAD BENGALURU 560 009.¶17
respondent
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK KANDAYA BHAVAN, K G ROAD BENGALURU 560 009.¶18
respondent
THE TAHSILDAR ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-560064.¶23

Coram

AI extract

E.S.INDIRESHauthor¶28

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 18 Jun 2026 · June
Registered: 17 Jun 2026
Case no.: WP/18245/2026
CNR: KAHC010406232026
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: E.s.indiresh
Disposal: DISPOSED
Case type: WRIT PETITION (KLR-RR/SUR)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from E.s.indiresh

Sri. C Manju, Vs the State of Karnataka
17 Jun 2026
Smt Chandramma Vs the State of Karnataka
17 Jun 2026
Sri Narayana N Vs the State of Karnataka
17 Jun 2026
Smt. Shakuntala Vs the State of Karnataka
18 Jun 2026
Sri K Seetharama Shetty Vs Deputy Director of Land Records
18 Jun 2026
Sri. Tahir Ali Vs the State of Karnataka
18 Jun 2026

Cite this judgement

Smt Gurramma v. the State of Karnataka, WP/18245/2026 (KA), decided on 18 June 2026.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Civil suit O.S.No.489/2011 resulted in a judgment and decree; the writ relief is sought in terms of that decree.
Respondent No.2 (Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District) passed an order in R.P.No.460/2023 (Annexure-C); the writ relief is sought in terms of that order.

View full history

Bench / Coram

E.S.INDIRESH

Parties & counsel