Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

M Shettappa vs Sub Registrar And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|14 March, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.41519/2014 (GM-ST/RN) BETWEEN:
M.SHETTAPPA, S/O. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O. HUSKUR VILLAGE, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. M. RAGHAVENDRACHAR, ADV.,) AND:
1. SUB-REGISTRAR, HNR.COMPLEX, I FLOOR, AT AND POST: SARJAPURA, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU-560 027.
2. SMT. S. KAMALA, W/O N.SUBRAMANI, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 3. SRI. N. SUBRAMANI, S/O. LATE SRI CHENGAIAH NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESPONDENTS No.2 AND 3 ARE R/AT NO.1485, 27TH CROSS, 24TH MAIN, BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU-560 070. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. C.M.RAGHUNATH, ADV., FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE ANN-F2 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 18.08.2014 AND CANCEL THE AGREEMENT DEED IN SY.NO.57 IS ILLEGAL AND ARBITRARY VIDE ANN-F DATED 9.7.2010.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Mr. M.Raghavendrachar, learned Counsel for the petitioner.
Smt. Niloufer Akbar, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. C.M. Raghunath, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this writ petition, petitioner prays to set- aside ‘Annexure-F2’ dated 18.08.2014 passed by respondent No.1.
3. On perusal of the aforesaid document dated 18.08.2014, it is evident that it is not an order, but it is an endorsement issued by the Senior Sub-Registrar, Sarjapura. The aforesaid endorsement does not agitate any rights of the parties. Therefore, the petitioner challenged the same. Prima facie appears to be misconceived. Petitioner shall be at liberty to take recourse to agitate his grievances in the civil suit, in accordance with law.
4. Accordingly, with the aforesaid liberty, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE cp*
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

M Shettappa vs Sub Registrar And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
14 March, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe