Dismissed

Sri.T.N.Radhakrishna v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Jun 2026WP/27323/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenged revenue orders directing maintenance of earlier records for scheduled property. During pendency, the second appeal RSA No.1 of 2021 was dismissed and mutation entries were effected pursuant to that decree. Holding the mutations merely consequential to adjudicated civil rights, the High Court found no ground for writ interference and dismissed the petition.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri.T.N.Radhakrishna Vs the State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:30982 WP No. 27323 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.27323 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. T.N. RADHAKRISHNA SON OF LATE NARAYANA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOSADURGA VILLAGE, Y N HOSAKOTE HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572202.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. FAYAZ SAB B.G., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶15

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

¶16

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU DISTRICT, TUMAKURU-572101.

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:30982 WP No. 27323 of 2024

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MADHUGIRI SUB-DIVISION, MADHUGIRI,

¶20

TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572132.

¶21

THE TAHASILDAR PAVAGADA TALUK, PAVAGADA, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572201.

¶22

SRI. J.N. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O LATE JULA NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT HOSADURGA VILLAGE, Y.N. HOSAKOTE HOBLI PAVAGADA TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 202.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. M.C. JAYAKIRTHI, ADVOCATE FOR R5)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AN IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.09.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN RP NO.83/2023 WHEREIN SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2023 PASSED IN RRT(A)(P) 69/2022 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AND ORDER DATED 04.12.2023 PASSED IN RRT(DIS)12/2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 AND FURTHER DIRECTED THE RESPONDENT NO.4 TO MAINTAIN THE EARLIER STATUS WITH REGARD TO THE REVENUE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY, WHICH IS PRODUCED HEREWITH FOR

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:30982 WP No. 27323 of 2024

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

THE KIND PERUSAL OF THIS HONBLE COURT AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-K, AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS AND PASSED WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AND OPPOSED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE.

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

The petitioner, in this writ petition, has assailed the order dated 18.09.2024 (Annexure-K) passed by respondent No.2 and the order dated 04.12.2023, seeking a direction to continue the names of the legal representatives of the petitioner in the revenue records.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶34

parties.

¶35

A perusal of the impugned order dated

¶36

18.09.2024 would indicate that respondent No.2 has

¶37

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:30982 WP No. 27323 of 2024

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

observed that the rights of the parties are subject to the judgment and decree to be passed by this Court in RSA No.1 of 2021.

¶40

The learned counsel appearing for

¶41

respondent No.5 has produced a copy of the judgment and decree dated 19.12.2025 passed in RSA No.1 of 2021, whereby the second appeal has been dismissed. It is not in dispute that the mutation entries have been effected pursuant to the civil proceedings and in consequence of the judgment rendered in the said second appeal.

¶42

In view of the subsequent dismissal of the second appeal and as the mutation entries are only consequential to the adjudication of the civil rights of the parties, no ground is made out for interference with the impugned orders in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:30982 WP No. 27323 of 2024

¶44

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

Accordingly, the writ petition stands

¶47

dismissed .

¶48

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶49

¶50

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12

Sri.T.N.Radhakrishna v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sri.T.N.Radhakrishna v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Mahadevappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Gowramma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Krishnappa Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Basheer Ulla Khan Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Chinnavenkatamma Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri. Balaji Raju Vs State of Karnataka