Mr Gilbert D Souza Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Mr Gilbert D Souza Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.2 (Tahasildar, Devanahalli Taluk) to enter the registered Partition Deed dated 03.07.2024 in the mutation records, change the names accordingly, and consider the petitioners' claim in accordance with law within two months from the date of receipt of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.2 (Tahasildar, Devanahalli Taluk) should be directed to effect mutation entries in favour of the petitioners pursuant to the registered Partition Deed dated 03rd July 2024 (Annexure-A) and the Intimation Notice in Case No.R.R.T/Dis/(Kasaba)C.R.81/2024 (Annexure-B). +1 more

Court's answer

Since the Partition Deed dated 03rd July 2024 is a registered document, it is the duty of respondent No.2 to enter it in the Mutation records and change the names as per the Partition Deed.

Ratio / Principle

If respondents 3 and 4 are aggrieved by the mutation entries, they are free to challenge the same in a manner known to law and to establish their right over the schedule property.

Key takeaways

Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the claim made by the petitioners in accordance with law within an outer limit of two months from the date of receipt of the order.ratio¶60

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Single-judge order (E.S. Indiresh, J.), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, dated 08.06.2026, disposing of Writ Petition No.32964 of 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Ten petitioners (several acting through GPA holder Banston D'Souza) sought a direction to respondent No.2, the Tahasildar, Devanahalli Taluk, to effect mutation entries pursuant to a registered Partition Deed dated 03.07.2024 (Annexure-A) and an Intimation Notice issued in Case No.R.R.T/Dis/(Kasaba)C.R.81/2024 (Annexure-B). Respondents 3 and 4 opposed, citing a lis pending before this Court in Commercial Appeal No.294 of 2025 concerning a Joint Development Agreement. Held: as the partition deed is a registered document, it is the duty of respondent No.2 to enter it in the mutation records and change the names as per the deed; respondents 3 and 4 remain free to challenge the mutation in a manner known to law and to establish their right over the schedule property. Respondent No.2 directed to consider the petitioners' claim in accordance with law within an outer limit of two months from receipt of the order.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:27175 WP NO.32964 OF 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 08^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.32964 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR)

BETWEEN:

MR. GILBERT D'SOUZA S/O LATE BENEDICT D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/AT NO.535, CHANNARAYAPATNA ROAD, NEAR OLD BUS STOP, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 562 110.

MRS. CYNTHIA LEWIS W/O LATE AUGUSTINE D'SOUZA, DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF LATE BENEDICT D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

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

MRS. BINITA D'SOUZA DAUHTER-IN-LAW OF LATE AUGUSTINE D'SOUZA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.

PETITIONERS NO.2 AND 3 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR G.P.A. HOLDER PETITIONER NO.4-BANSTON D'SOUZA, S/O LATE AUGUSTINE D'SOUZA.

MR. BANSTON D'SOUZA, S/O LATE AUGUSTINE D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS.

PETITIONERS 2 TO 4 ARE R/AT NO.534, PUTTAPPANAGUDI BEEDI,

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:27175 WP NO.32964 OF 2024

HC-KAR

DEVANAHALLI TOWN, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU - 562 110.

MR. XAVIER RUDOLF D'SOUZA S/O LATE BENEDICT D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.1-62, BENRISE KACHUR, BARKUR, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 210.

MRS. THERESALOBO W/O LATE BENEDICT D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 93 YEARS, R/AT NO. 1-62, RAYARA THOTA KACHUR, BARKUR, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 210.

MRS. DULCINE JOSEPH CORDA D/O LATE BENEDICT D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/AT NO.A-24, TULIP APARTMENT, SAI BABA NAGAR, NEAR ST. THOMAS CHURCH, MIRA ROAD EAST, MIRA-BHAYANDAR, THANE, MAHARASHTRA-40 1 107.

MRS. DEJI BARNES D/O LATE BENEDICT D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT NO.1-62, RAYARA THOTA KACHUR, BARKUR, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 210.

MRS. WILMA FERNANDES D/O LATE BENEDICT D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT NO.10-135 (2) PHIL-WIL, SHANTHI NAGAR, NEAR S.M.C., KODANGALLU, MOODABIDRI, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 197.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:27175 WP NO.32964 OF 2024

HC-KAR

MRS. MEENA RITA SALDANHA D/O LATE BENEDICT D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. R/AT H.NO.11-68C, KALAIBAIL, PITHRODI POST, UDYAVARA VILLAGE, UDUPI - 574 118.

PETITIONER NOS. 5 TO 10 ARE REP. BY THEIR G.P.A. HOLDER PETITIONER NO.4 - BANSTON D'SOUZA. S/O LATE AUGUSTINE D'SOUZA.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

THE TAHASILDAR DEVANAHALLI TALUK, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.

SRI. G. CHANDRANNA S/O LATE H.V. GOPALAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT NO.29, 2^ND CROSS, CHIRANJEEVI LAYOUT, HEBBALA KEMPAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 024.

SRI. R. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE REDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT NO.105, 'LAKSHMI NILAYA',

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:27175 WP NO.32964 OF 2024

HC-KAR

4^TH CROSS, 5^TH MAIN, PAPANNA BLOCK, GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 032.

….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. NARASIMHARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO EFFECT MUTATION ENTRIES IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTIES HELD BY THEM PURSUANT TO THE PARTITION DEED DATED 03^RD JULY, 2024 AND THE INTIMATION NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RRESPONDNET NO.2 IN CASE NO. R.R.T/DIS/(KASABA)C.R.81/2024 VIDE ANNEXURES 'A' AND 'B'; AND ETC.

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

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

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioners are seeking direction to the

respondent No.2 to effect Mutation entries in favour of the petitioners in respect of the property held by them pursuant to the registered Partition Deed dated 03^rd July, 2024 (AnnexureA) and the Intimation Notice issued by the respondent No.2 in Case No.R.R.T/Dis/(Kasaba)C.R.81/2024 (Annexure-B).

Heard Sri. Rajashekar S., learned counsel appearing for petitioners; Sri. Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:27175 WP NO.32964 OF 2024

HC-KAR

Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2; and Sri. Narasimharaju, learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4.

Sri. Rajashekar S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners refers to the registered Partition Deed dated 03^rd July, 2024 (Annexure-A) and submitted that the partition has

been effected amongst the family members of the petitioners. Accordingly, he sought for direction to the respondent No.2 to effect mutation entries in favour of the petitioners in respect of the subject property.

Per contra, Sri. Narasimharaju, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 submitted that the lis between the parties is pending before this Court in Commercial Appeal No.294 of 2025. He further submits that the lis between the parties as to the Joint Development Agreement is required to be tested before the Division Bench of this Court in the aforementioned Commercial Appeal. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the petition.

Sri. Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 argued

6 -

NC: 2026:KHC:27175 WP NO.32964 OF 2024

HC-KAR

in lines of learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4 and sought for dismissal of the petition.

In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for parties, it is not in dispute that the Partition Deed dated 03^rd July, 2024 (Annexure-A) has been executed between the family members of the petitioners. Therefore, as the said partition deed is a registered document, it is the duty of the respondent No.2 to enter the same in the Mutation records and change the names as per the Partition Deed. In the event, if the respondents 3 and 4 are aggrieved by the same, it is open for them to challenge the same in a manner known to law and to establish their right over the schedule property. Accordingly, respondent No.2 is directed to consider claim made by the petitioners in accordance with law, within an outer limit of two months from the date of receipt of this order. With this observation, writ petition stands disposed of.

SD/(E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE

ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66