Sri Munianjinappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri Munianjinappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.2 – Tahsildar, Bangalore East Taluk, to consider the petitioners' application (Annexure-A dated 01.09.2025), issue notice to all concerned, pass orders in accordance with law, and complete the entire exercise within three months from receipt of a copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.2 – the Tahsildar, Bengaluru East Taluk, should be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioners' representation dated 01-09-2025 (Annexure-A) requesting change of katha/revenue records for Old Sy.No.4 (1 acre 20 guntas) and Sy.No.4 (1 acre 5 guntas), Goravigere Village. +1 more

Court's answer

The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 – Tahsildar, Bangalore East Taluk, to consider the application given by the petitioners, issue notice to all concerned and thereafter pass orders in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

The Court held that the provisions of Sections 128 and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act require the revenue authorities to consider entry of the names of the subsequent purchaser or transferee in accordance with law, for which notice will have to be issued to the present Kathedar or the person who has transferred the property in favour of the transferee.

Key takeaways

The entire exercise (consideration of the application, issuance of notice and passing of orders) shall be completed as expeditiously as possible.ratio¶¶46
The exercise shall in any event be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶¶49

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU (Hon'ble Mr. Justice R Devdas), Oral Order dated 09.01.2026 in WP No. 37600 of 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) [NC: 2026:KHC:1314]. Mandamus sought against the Tahsildar, Bengaluru East Taluk for inaction on the petitioners' representation dated 01-09-2025 (Annexure-A) requesting change of katha/revenue records for Old Sy.No.4 (1 acre 20 guntas) and Sy.No.4 (1 acre 5 guntas), Goravigere Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk, as per gift deed dated 18.07.1929 and sale deed dated 26.02.1943; the grandfather Munishamappa had purchased 1 acre 5 guntas under the 1943 registered sale deed, and after the death of the father Chikkamunishamappa the petitioners claimed revenue entry. Holding that Sections 128 and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act require the revenue authorities to consider entry of the names of a subsequent purchaser or transferee in accordance with law, with notice to the present Kathedar or transferor, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing respondent No.2 to consider the application, issue notice to all concerned and pass orders in accordance with law, the entire exercise to be completed expeditiously and at any rate within three months from receipt of a copy of the order.

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:1314 WP No. 37600 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

WRIT PETITION NO. 37600 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR)

BETWEEN:

SRI MUNIANJINAPPA S/O. MUNICHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

SMT. S. SHOBHA W/O MUNIANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

SMT. SHYLAJA D/O.MUNIANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SRI. MADHAN KAUMAR M S/O. MUNIANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

ALL ARE R/AT GORAVIGERE VILLAGE, KANNAMAGAL POST, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560067.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SHEKARAPPA., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S BUILDING,

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:1314 WP No. 37600 of 2025

HC-KAR

BENGALURU- 560001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

THE TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, K.R PURA BENGALURU-560036.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.V.SESHU., HCGP)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS BY THE DIRECTIONS TO RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER AND DISPOSE OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01-09-2025 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONERS, VIDE ANNEXURE -A, REQUESTING FOR CHANGE OF KATHA / REVENUE RECORDS WITH RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY BEARING OLD SY. NO.4, MEASURING 1 ACRE 20 GUNTAS AND SY.NO.4, MEASURING 1 ACRE 5 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT GORAVIGERE VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU AS PER GIFT DEED DATED 18.07.1929 AND SALE DEED DATED 26.02.1943, IN THE NAMES OF PETITIONERS AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

ORAL ORDER

Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents.

The grievance of the petitioners is that their application in Annexure-A dated 01.09.2025 given to the

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1314 WP No. 37600 of 2025

HC-KAR

2^nd respondent – Tahsildar, Bangalore East Taluk, has not

been considered and no orders are passed.

On going through the petition documents filed along with the petition, it is clear that it is the contention of the petitioners that their grandfather late Sri Munishamappa purchased 1 acre 5 guntas of land in Survey No.4 of Goravigere Village, Bidrahalli Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk, under registered sale deed dated 26.02.1943. It is contented that after the demise of Munushamappa, the petitioners along with their father are in continuous possession of the property in question. Now after the death of the petitioner's father Sri Chikkamunishamappa, the petitioners are claiming entry of their name in the revenue records pursuant to the registered sale deed.

Learned High Court Government Pleader raises

an objection that even during the lifetime of Sri Munishamappa, he never sought for mutation entry in

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1314 WP No. 37600 of 2025

HC-KAR

accordance with law and therefore such a contention at a belated stage should not be entertained.

Having noticed the contention of the learned

counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court is of the considered opinion that the provisions contained in Sections 128 and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, requires the revenue authorities to consider entry of the names of the subsequent purchaser or transferee in accordance with law. For that purpose, notice will have to be issued to the present Kathedar or the person who has transferred the property in favour of the transferee.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed

of with a direction to the respondent No.2 – Tahsildar, Bangalore East Taluk, to consider the application given by the petitioners, issue notice to all concerned and thereafter pass orders in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:1314 WP No. 37600 of 2025

HC-KAR

and at any rate within a period of three months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Ordered accordingly.

Learned High Court Government Pleader is

permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today.

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

KLY CT: JL