Karnataka High Court
Sri Narayanaswamy vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 January, 2023
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
WP No. 12107 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 12107 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI NARAYANASWAMY
S/O LATE RAMASANJEEVAIAH
AGED 51 YEARS
2. SRI TANAPPA
S/O LATE RAMASANJEEVAIAH
AGED 47 YEARS
3. SRI RAMACHANDRAPPA
S/O LATE RAMASANJEEVAIAH
AGED 45 YEARS
4. SMT. SHARADAMMA
D/O LATE RAMASANJEEVAIAH
AGED 55 YEARS
Digitally 5. SMT. MANJAMMA
signed by
JUANITA S/O LATE RAMASANJEEVAIAH
THEJESWINI
Location: AGED 54 YEARS
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
6. SMT. SUNITHA
W/O LATE RAMANJINAPPA
AGED 47 YEARS
-2-
WP No. 12107 of 2022
7. SRI PRAVEEN
S/O LATE RAMANJINAPPA
AGED 30 YEARS
8. SMT. SHILPA
D/O LATE RAMANJINAPPA
AGED 25 YEARS
ALL ARE R/AT BUDIGERE VILLAGE
CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 129
THE PETITIONERS ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR
DULY CONSTITUTED REGISTERED POWER OF
ATTORNEY HOLDER
SRI MURTHY
S/O LATE NAGARAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT BUDIGERE VILLAGE
CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 129
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR SWAMY K B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
VIDHANA SOUDHA
VIDHANA VEEDHI
BANGALORE - 560 001
-3-
WP No. 12107 of 2022
2. THE TAHASILDAR
MINI VIDHANASOUDHA BUILDING
B B ROAD, DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110
3. OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
OF LAND RECORDS
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
DEVANAHALLI
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110
4. OFFICE OF SUB REGISTRAR
MINI VIDHANASOUDHA
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
DEVANAHALLI - 562 110
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SESHU V., HCGP)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT
THE R-3 TO ISSUE THE 11-E SKETCH IN RESPECT OF THE
5.1/2 GUNTAS AND 4 GUNTAS TOTALLY MEASURING 9.1/2
GUNTAS IN SY NO.1/6 SITUATED AT BUDIGERE VILLAGE,
CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT AND ALSO DIRECT THE R-4 TO
REGISTER THE REGISTERED SALE DEED IN RESPECT OF THE
5.1/2 GUNTAS AND 4 GUNTAS TOTALLY MEASURING 9.1/2
GUNTAS IN SY NO.1/6 SITUATED AT BUDIGERE VILLAGE,
CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT AS PER THE SCHEDULED
MENTIONED IN THE ANNEXURE-E AND F AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
WP No. 12107 of 2022
ORDER
R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for all the respondents.
2. The petitioners seek a writ of mandamus directing the Assistant Director of Land Records, Devanahalli Taluk (hereinafter referred to as 'the ADLR', for short) to issue a 11E sketch in respect of 5½ guntas and 4 guntas, totally measuring 9½ guntas in Sy.No.1/6 of Budigere village, Channarayapatna Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural District and also to direct the Sub-Registrar, Devanahalli Taluk to register the Sale Deed presented by the petitioners in respect of the lands in question. However, since the Sub-Registrar, Devanahalli Taluk issued an endorsement dated 06.04.2022 and similar endorsement was also issued by the ADLR on 11.04.2022, the petitioners are also seeking to quash and set aside the endorsements.
-5-WP No. 12107 of 2022
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners No.6 to 8, who were the agreement holders of the lands in question filed O.S.No.1501/2006 seeking Specific Performance of the Contract. However, the parties filed a compromise petition before the civil court, wherein the plaintiffs agreed to pay Rs.57 Lakhs, while the defendants agreed to receive the same and execute a Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiffs. Accordingly, a compromise decree was passed by the civil court, Devanahalli on 26.07.2016. It is the contention of the petitioners that the Sale Deed was presented before respondent No.4-Sub- Registrar, Devanahalli Taluk and the Sub-Registrar issued the endorsement dated 06.04.2022 declining to register the document unless a 11E sketch is produced by the parties. Later the petitioners approach the ADLR, Devanahalli Taluk and the ADLR also issued an endorsement on 11.04.2022 stating that in another suit in O.S.No.1579/2006, there is an order of temporary injunction which is entered in the RTC in Col.No.11 and -6- WP No. 12107 of 2022 therefore, the 11E sketch cannot be prepared by the ADLR.
4. During the course of these proceedings, it is brought to the notice of this Court that Sy.No.1/6 of Budigere village, which belongs to petitioners No.1 to 5 has a total extent of 26 guntas and the petitioners have entered into 3 separate sale agreements. Although the suit filed at the hands of the petitioners No.6 to 8 herein in O.S.No.1501/2006, was decreed in terms of the compromise petition, nevertheless, in respect of other piece of property, there is admittedly orders of temporary injunction passed by civil court. This Court also finds that unless the agreement holders who have filed other two suits in O.S.No.1500/2006 and 1579/2006 also participate in the survey to identify 9½ guntas which are required to be carved out of 26 guntas, the survey authorities including the ADLR will not be in a position to carry out the survey and demarcate the property to an extent of 9½ -7- WP No. 12107 of 2022 guntas. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that unless the petitioners herein, more particularly, petitioners No.1 to 5, who are the defendants in the two suits in O.S.No.1500/2006 and 1579/2006 seek appropriate permission at the hands of the civil court for preparation of the 11E sketch, insofar as 9½ gutnas, which are not the subject matter of the two suits and the civil court grants such a permission, the authorities will not be in a position to carry out the survey and issue a 11E sketch in favour of the petitioner.
5. Consequently, this writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to petitioners No.1 to 5 to file necessary applications in O.S.No.1500/2006 and 1579/2006 for preparation of a 11E sketch, insofar as 9½ guntas are concerned, which are not the subject matter of the two suits. If such applications are filed, the civil court shall consider the same in accordance with law and pass necessary orders.
-8-WP No. 12107 of 2022
Ordered accordingly.
6. Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file Memo of Appearance within a period of four weeks from today.
Sd/-
JUDGE DL