Disposed

Smt. Vaijayanthi v. the Town Municipality

Karnataka HC16 Apr 2026WP/39241/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought a mandamus directing the Town Municipality to effect khata transfer of their property. The State offered to consider an online application with all particulars. The Court permitted the petitioners to apply online and directed the respondent to decide per law within three months.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to make online khata-change application; respondent to consider it in accordance with law and pass orders within three months.

Smt. Vaijayanthi Vs the Town Municipality — Municipal and Town Planning | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:20713 WP No. 39241 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 39241 OF 2025 (LB-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. VAIJAYANTHI AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS W/O LATE N. LAKSHMAN RAO

¶10

L. HARISH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O LATE N. LAKSHMAN RAO

¶11

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

BOTH ARE R/AT GUMBAZ ROAD GANJAM, SHRIRANGAPATTANA TOWN SHRIRANGAPATTANA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT.

¶13

(BY SRI. C.R.SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

&PETITIONERS

¶16

THE TOWN MUNICIPALITY SHRIRANGAPATTANA TOWN SHRIRANGAPATTANA - 571 438 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER.

¶17

&RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA, AGA)

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:20713 WP No. 39241 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE AND TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO AFFECT THE KHATHA IN FAVOR OF THE PETITIONERS IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY BEARING KHATHA NO. 282/1819 BELONGED TO LATE N. LAKSHMAN RAO SITUATED AT GUMBAZ ROAD, GANJAM, SHRIRANGAPATTANA TOWN, SHRIRANGAPATTANA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE AWARD OF COSTS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶23

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶25

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:20713 WP No. 39241 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

The case of the petitioners is that, they are the owners of

¶30

the property which is the subject matter of the writ petition and they have requested the respondent to issue a khata in their favour. However, as the same has not been considered, the present writ petition is filed with a prayer to direct the respondent to issue khata in their favour in respect to the property which is the subject matter of the writ petition.

¶31

Learned AGA upon instructions submits, if the petitioners were to make an online application along with all the necessary particulars, the case of the petitioners would be considered in accordance with law. His submission is placed on record.

¶32

Petitioners are agreeable to make an online application with all the necessary particulars.

¶33

Hence, the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

(i) Liberty is granted to the petitioners to make an online application for change of khata in respect of the property which is the subject

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:20713 WP No. 39241 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

matter of the writ petition to the respondent

¶40

along with all the necessary particulars;

¶41

(ii) If such an application is made, respondent shall consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months thereafter;

¶42

(iii) The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶43

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶44

PGG

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

Smt. Vaijayanthi v. the Town Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vaijayanthi v. the Town Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohan Raj R Vs the Commissioner

Sri K Subramanya Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Shyla Janardhan Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Yadav B a Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Vinaya Gandhi Vs the Principal Secretary

St. Lawrence Church Vs the State of Karnataka