Smt Swathi M C vs The State Of Karnataka on 30 November, 2022

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Swathi M C vs The State Of Karnataka on 30 November, 2022

Bench: Krishna S.Dixit

                           1




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

 DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER , 2022

                      BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

 WRIT PETITION NO.23711 OF 2022(KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT. SWATHI M C,
D/O S CHANDRAYYA,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
W/O RAJKUMAR,
R/AT NO. 629, NAGARTHAPETE,
BUDIKOTEHOBLI, BANGARPET TALUK,
KOLAR DIST -563 114.
                                         ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.K.S.NARESH SANTHOSH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
   DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
   MS BUILDING, BENGALORE-560 001.

2. THE TAHSILDAR,
   ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL,
   BENGALURU SOUTH DIST,
   BENGALURU-562 106.

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
   BANGALORE SOUTH SUB DIVISION,
   BANGALORE DISTRICT,
   BANGALORE - 560 001.
                                      ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.R SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA)
                             2



     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE
REPRESENTATION DATED 08.02.2022 A COPY OF WHICH IS
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND EFFECT THE KHATA IN
RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY MEASURING 23 GUNTAS IN
SY.NO.83/1A    OF    MUGULURU     VILLAGE,   KUGUR
POST,SARJAPURAHOBLI,   ANEKAL    TALUK,  BANGALORE
EXPEDITIOUSLY.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

                         ORDER

The short grievance of the Petitioner is as to non- updation of entries in the Revenue Records concerning the subject property though there is Probate Order which prima facie validated the Will in question. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that a Probate operates as an order in rem in terms of Section 41 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and therefore, the Revenue Authorities are bound to act upon the same whether it was obtained on contest or not.

2. Learned AGA appearing for the official Respondents submits that the Proviso to Section 135 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 contemplates a 3 Decree obtained in a suit and therefore, the Probate does not approximate to a Decree passed in a suit more particularly when a suit is instituted by the presentation of the Plaint in terms of Section 26 of CPC, 1908 whereas the Probate proceedings are instituted by the presentation of a Petition under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the Writ Petition.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition papers, this Court is inclined to grant a limited indulgence in the matter inasmuch as, there cannot be much difference between a Decree obtained in a civil suit contemplated under the Proviso to Section 135 of the 1964 Act and a Probate granted in respect of a Will under the 1925 Act for the purpose of making entries in the Revenue Records subject to all just exceptions into which the argued case of Petitioner does not fit.

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed off directing the Respondents to make entries in respect of the subject property on the basis of the Probate of the Will concerned. Time for compliance is sixty days.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE Bsv

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court