Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri R Parthasarathi vs The Deputy Commissioner on 16 April, 2024

Author: R Devdas

Bench: R Devdas

                                              -1-
                                                           NC: 2024:KHC:15019
                                                          WP No. 3982 of 2024




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

                                            BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 3982 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)


                   BETWEEN:

                   SRI. R. PARTHASARATHI,
                   S/O RANGAIAH,
                   AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,
                   R/A ANKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
                   KAILANCHA HOBLI,
                   RAMANAGARA TALUK,
                   RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159.
                                                                 ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. HARSHA, ADVOCATE)
                   AND:

                   1.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
                         RAMANAGARA DISTRICT,
                         RAMANAGARA - 562 138.
Digitally signed
by JUANITA         2.    THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
THEJESWINI               RAMANAGARA SUB DIVISION,
Location: HIGH           RAMANAGARA TALUK,
COURT OF                 RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 138.
KARNATAKA
                   3.    THE TAHASILDAR,
                         RAMANAGARA TALUK,
                         RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 138.

                   4.    SMT. LAKSHMAMMA,
                         W/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA,
                         R/AT ANKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
                         KAILANCHA HOBLI,
                         RAMANAGARA TALUK,
                         RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159.
                                 -2-
                                             NC: 2024:KHC:15019
                                           WP No. 3982 of 2024




5.    SMT. RENUKA,
      W/O LATE SHIVANNA M,
      R/AT ANKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
      BANNIKUPPE POST,
      KAILANCHA HOBLI,
      RAMANAGARA TALUK,
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159.
                                                ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. C.N. MAHADESHWARAN, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

       THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 17.11.2023, IN R.P NO. 83/2011-12 PASSED BY
THE         DEPUTY   COMMISSIONER,         RAMANAGARA      VIDE
ANNEXURE-D AND CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 23.11.2009 IN R.A /LKP 485/2008-09 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA SUB-
DIVISION, RAMANAGARA VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

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

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for respondent No.1 to 3. Notice to respondent Nos.4 and 5 are not necessary for the following reason.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved of the impugned orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner as well as the Deputy -3- NC: 2024:KHC:15019 WP No. 3982 of 2024 Commissioner. It is not disputed by the petitioner that the husband of respondent No.4 namely late Sri. Javaregowda, purchased a portion of the property in Sy.No.43/4 of Ankanahalli Village, Kailancha Hobli, Ramanagara Taluk, under a registered sale deed dated 27.12.1979, from the father of the petitioner, Sri.Patel Rangaiah. Since the name of the purchaser was not entered in the land records, Respondent No.4, after the demise of her husband, approached the Assistant Commissioner, invoking Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, seeking a direction for mutation entry in terms of the registered document. The Assistant Commissioner passed an order on 23.11.2009 allowing the appeal while directing the Tahsildar to mutate the revenue records in the name of the legal heirs of Sri.Javaregowda, on the strength of the registered sale deed. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner, approached the Deputy Commissioner, questioning the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner dismissed the revision petition, upholding the orders of the Assistant Commissioner.

-4-

NC: 2024:KHC:15019 WP No. 3982 of 2024

3. In the considered opinion of this Court, no infirmity can be found in the impugned orders, since the mutation entry is bound to be made in the name of the purchaser, having regard to the express provisions contained in Section 128 of the Act. If the petitioner is aggrieved of any dispute regarding the measurement or boundaries of the property in terms of the sale deeds, the petitioner will have to approach the competent civil Court to get a declaration in her favour. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed.

Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance for within a period of four weeks.

Sd/-

JUDGE rv CT: BHK