IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION Nos.2477-2478/2019 (KLR RES) BETWEEN 1. SHRI. RAMANJINAPPA, S/O. LATE ANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT ILLTHORE VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, PIN CODE-562 110.
2. SHRI. MOHAN S/O. LATE ANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, RESIDING AT ILLTHORE VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, PIN CODE: 562110. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI D R RAVISHANKAR, ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 1ST FLOOR, ’JILLADALITHA BHAVANA’ BEERASANDRA VILLAGE KUNDANA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK, PIN CODE-562 110.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION DODDABALLAPURA BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN CODE-561 203.
4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR KUNDANA NADA KACHERI KUNDANA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK, PIN CODE-562 110.
5. SHRI. PILLA MUNIYAPPA S/O. LATE DODDAMUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, RESIDING AT ILLTHORE VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, PIN CODE-562 110. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHIVASHANKAR K, ADV. FOR C/R5, SRI. VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA FOR R1 TO R4.) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEF TO THE PETITIONERS AS AGAINST THE R-5, QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DATED 02.01.2019 IN CASE NO.RP97/13-14 AS PER ANNEXURE-A ETC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ‘PRELIMINARY HEARING’ THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioners have assailed the order passed by the respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner dated 02.01.2019 in case No.RT 97/2013-14 inter alia seeking a direction to respondent No.4-Deputy Tahsildar, not to accept the mutation in favour of the respondent No.5 as per the impugned order and further direct the respondent No.4 to continue the revenue entries standing in the name of the petitioners’ father in accordance with MRNo.H9/2013-14 as per Annexure-G.
2. The petitioners submit that originally the land bearing Survey No.50, measuring 1 acre 23 guntas belongs to one Sri. Malagachari. After his demise, his daughter Smt. Nyanamma is the holder of the said land. The petitioners’ father and respondent No.5 are cultivating the said land under the tenancy. Subsequent to amendment of Section 77 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, the respondent No.5 filed an application in Form No.7 for grant of the above land under the tenancy rights. Since the petitioners’ father and respondent No.5 were jointly cultivating the said land prior to 1970-71, respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner granted the said land in favour of the respondent No.5-Sri. Pilla Muniyappa being the kartha of the joint family, who had filed Form No.7 for grant of the land. The petitioners’ father and respondent No.5 agreed for execution of the release deed pursuant to the division of the family properties and after taking their share in the said family properties. Accordingly, the petitioners’ father Anjanappa executed a registered release deed dated 07.08.1980 in favour of respondent No.5-Pilla Muniyappa giving up his rights to some of the properties in favour of the respondent No.5. As per the said arrangement the land in question namely, Survey No.50, measuring 1 acre 33 guntas of Illthore village falls to the share of the petitioners’ father. This factual position has been accepted by the respondent No.5 in the pending suit, O.S. No.239/2008 before the competent civil court as per the written statement filed therein.
3. It is by virtue of O.S. No.239/2008 which is filed by Sri. Ashwathappa and Smt. Anjanamma, family members of the petitioners and the respondent No.5 herein seeking for partition of the properties including the land in question, the Deputy Commissioner- respondent No.2 has set aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, wherein, revenue entries were mutated in the name of the petitioners herein.
4. Learned counsel Sri.D.R. Ravishankar, appearing for the petitioners reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition submits that the order of the respondent No.2 is perfunctory as the written statement filed by the respondent No.5 in the said O.S. No.239/2008 has not been properly appreciated. Indeed there is no dispute regarding the property in question allotted to the share of the petitioners herein by virtue of the registered release deed, the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner to mutate the revenue entries in terms of the final judgment and decree to be passed in O.S. No.239/2008 is virtually contrary to the partition effected among the family members and the registered release deed executed between the petitioners’ father and respondent No.5.
5. The learned counsel Sri. Shivashankar K. appearing for respondent No.5 would submit that the litigation now pending before the competent civil court in O.S. No.239/2008 includes the property in question and obviously has a bearing on the revenue entries effected, more particularly on the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner-respondent No.3. Considering the same, the respondent No.4 has rightly set aside the revenue entries mutated in the name of the petitioners and directed to enter the Khata of the property in question in terms of the judgment and decree to be passed in O.S. No.239/2008 and the same deserves to be confirmed by this court.
6. Having heard the rival submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the O.S. No.239/2008 is pending before the competent civil court wherein, the property in question is involved. In view of the same, the registered release deed on which much emphasis is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners’ has to be considered subject to the result of O.S.No.239/2008. In such circumstances, this court finds that the justice would be sub-served in directing the revenue authorities to modify the impugned order, entering the names of both the petitioners and respondent No.5 in the revenue records with the details of the O.S. No.239/2008 and the same shall be subject to the result of the said O.S. No.239/2008.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, these writ petitions stand disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE Chs* CT-HR