Karnataka High Court
Munirahmed Abdulrashid Bagalkoti vs The Sub-Registrar on 8 August, 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.114086 OF 2019 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
MUNIRAHMED ABDULRASHID BAGALKOTI
S/O ABDULRASHID BAGALKOTI
AGED ABOUT: 57 YEARS
R/AT: HOUSE NO.3715
DARBAR GALLI
BELAGAVI-590 001.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K.RAGHAVENDRA RAO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE SUB-REGISTRAR
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA
STATION ROAD
KHANAPUR TALUK
BELAGAVI-591 302.
2 . THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF
LAND RECORDS
KHANAPUR, 1ST FLOOR
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA
KHANAPUR TALUK
BELAGAVI-591 302.
2
3 . THE TAHSILDAR
KHANAPUR TALUK
BELAGAVI DISTRICT-591 302.
4 . THE DEPARTMENT OF
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS
M.S. BUIDLING
BENGALURU-560 001.
REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER
5 . THE DEPARTMENT OF
RURAL DEVELOPOMENT
AND PANCHAYAT RAJ
M.S. BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001.
REP. BY ITS COMMISIONER
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, HCGP)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A
WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT,
ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE IMPUGNED
COMMUNICATION DATED 26.08.2019 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT
NO.1 IN NO.PENDING: 104/07-08 NOTICE: 100/19-20 FOUND
AT ANNEXURE-F AND ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION WITH COSTS
AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 07.08.2024, THIS DAY ORDER WAS
PRONOUNCED THEREIN, AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
3
C.A.V. ORDER
In the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks a writ
of certiorari to quash the impugned communication dated
26.08.2019 issued by respondent No.1. The communication
indicated that the registration of the sale deed, pending for
want of an 11E sketch, would be rejected if the said sketch
was not furnished. The petitioner challenges this decision
before the Court.
2. The petitioner contends that he purchased a
portion of agricultural land in R.S.No.108, totaling 8 acres
and 20 guntas. Despite collecting registration charges and
issuing a receipt, respondent No.1 refused to register the
sale deed due to the absence of the 11E sketch. The sale
deed in question is dated 28.08.2007. The petitioner
asserts that an application for 11E sketch was submitted to
the Survey Office, Khanapur, on 06.10.2007. However, the
authorities have failed to survey the land and fix the
boundaries as per the extent purchased by the petitioner
4
under the sale deed. As a result, the registration of the sale
deed has been kept in abeyance since 2007.
3. The Court observed that the case reflects a
serious lapse on the part of the respondents. While
respondent No.1 insists on the petitioner furnishing the 11E
sketch, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have failed to survey the
land and determine its boundaries. This failure has resulted
in the registration of the sale deed being delayed
indefinitely.
4. The Court referred to a similar issue addressed
by a coordinate Bench in the case of Smt. Vaishali vs.
State of Karnataka1. The Bench noted that the State
Government's website does not allow the uploading of
registered documents without the 11E sketch. In light of
this, the coordinate Bench, referring to its decisions in
G. Ramachar and Another vs. State of Karnataka and
1
W.P.No.103813/2021 Dtd: 05.10.2021
5
Others2 and Smt. Vaishali vs. The Sub-Registrar3, set
aside the endorsements issued by the authorities and
directed the Sub-Registrar to register the sale deed and
hand over the original copy without insisting on the 11E
sketch. The Bench also directed the State to update the
website to facilitate the uploading of registered documents
without the 11E sketch.
5. While acknowledging that the present case is
covered by the judgment of the coordinate Bench, this
Court noted that the judgment is currently stayed and
pending consideration before the Division Bench. Due to the
interim order granted by the Division Bench, which stayed
the earlier judgment, the Court determined that it could not
issue a mandamus against respondent No.1/Sub-Registrar
to register the sale deed without the 11E sketch. However,
the Court finds it appropriate to issue directions to
respondent Nos.2 and 3 to survey the land in Sy.No.108
2
AIR 2016(3) KLJ Page 1
3
W.P.No.117177/2019 Dtd: 18.03.2021
6
and effect sub-division based on the sale deed dated
28.08.2007.
6. The petitioner, who purchased a portion of
agricultural land in Sy.No.108 in 2007, has faced an undue
and protracted delay in registering the sale deed due to the
absence of the required 11E sketch. Despite paying the
necessary registration charges, the registration process has
been kept in abeyance for over a decade. The petitioner's
plight is exacerbated by the fact that respondent Nos.2 and
3 have failed to survey the land and delineate its
boundaries, thereby hindering the issuance of the 11E
sketch. This situation has left the petitioner remediless,
unable to secure legal recognition of his property rights.
The Court acknowledges this issue and, while respecting the
interim order of the Division Bench, emphasizes the
necessity of providing a remedy.
7
7. The Court emphasizes that a citizen who has
purchased property for valuable consideration should not be
left without a remedy. The petitioner has faced undue delay
since 2007 due to the pending registration of the sale deed.
Given that the matter is currently before the Division Bench
concerning the requirement of the 11E sketch for the
registration of sale deeds, this Court decides that it is
appropriate to issue a mandamus to respondent No.3 to
survey the land and issue the 11E sketch. This would
enable the petitioner to proceed with the registration of the
sale deed by respondent No.1/Sub-Registrar.
8. For the reasons stated supra, this Court
proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ petition is allowed-in-part;
(ii) The impugned communication dated 26.08.2019 issued by respondent No.1 as per Annexure-F is hereby quashed;
8(iii) Respondent No.3 is directed to carry out the survey based on the petitioner's application dated 06.10.2007, under Reference No.Misc/SK/7/07-08, which was forwarded to respondent No.3's office on 12.11.2007, vide Reference No.LND/CWD/631/07-08.
(iv) This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;
(v) Pending I.As., if any, do not survive for consideration and stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA