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

Sri Pedda Reddy And Others vs The Assistant Commissioner And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|29 May, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NOs.31137-31138/2010( KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN 1. SRI PEDDA REDDY S/O LATE YELLA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 2. SRI BALA REDDY S/O LATE YELLA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT H. HOSAHALLI VILLAGE, HENNAGARA POST, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI C R GOPALASWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE SOUTH SUB – DIVISION, BANGALORE.
2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL.
3. SRI C N RAVI S/O NARAYANA REDDY MAJOR, R/AT NO.8/15, 3RD VASANTHA NILAYA, RAMARAO LAYOUT, MIRZA ROAD, ANEKAL TOWN, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT 4. SRI NARAYANA REDDY S/O LATE YELLA REDDY MAJOR SINCE DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES 4(a) SMT.JAYAMMA W/O LATE SRI NARAYANA REDDY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NO.8/15, 3RD VASANTHA NILAYA, RAMARAO LAYOUT, MIRZA ROAD, ANEKAL TOWN, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI Y.K.NARAYANA SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR R4(a) PROPOSED R4(b) IS ALREADY ON RECORD AS R3 PROPOSED R4(c) & (d) NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER 08.11.2017 & VIDE ORDER DATED 04.02.2019 APPLICATION TO BRING ON RECORD IS DISMISSED) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, BANGALORE, DATED 30.04.2010 AT ANNEXURE C AND ALL OTHER REVENUE ENTRIES MADE BY VIRTUE OF ANNEXURE-C IN FAVOUR OF FOURTH RESPONDENT.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioners 1 and 2 and 4th respondent are brothers. The 3rd respondent in this proceedings is son of 4th respondent.
2. It is the case of petitioners that the property belonging to their family was divided among themselves. In the said partition, the property which was allotted to 4th respondent is said to have sold by him to petitioners. Thereafter, the said land is mutated to the name of petitioners vide MR.No.1/2009-2010. However, the said entry was subjected to challenge by 3rd respondent before the Tahsildar of H.Hosahalli village, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, who in turn had referred the same to Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru South Sub Division, which is registered as RA(A) 44/2009-2010, wherein he would accept the note put up by Tahsildar and consequently, set aside MR.No.7/2009-2010 as if he is deleting MR.No.1/2009- 2010, which is given effect to and the revenue entry of said land is re-registered in the name of 4th respondent in MR.No.1/2010-11, which is subject matter of challenge in these writ petitions on the ground that no notice was given to petitioners 1 and 2 before effecting such change in the mutation entry.
3. In the meanwhile, it is brought to the notice of this Court that very same subject matter is seized in original suit which was filed by 3rd respondent herein in OS.No.256/2004, which was disposed of by judgment dated 10.6.2009 and it was subject matter of RA.No.36/2009-2010 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Anekal. It is stated that said regular appeal is also disposed of and now the matter is pending in second appeal before the co-ordinate bench of this Court in RSA.Nos.277 and 278/2015.
4. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner in No.RA(A).44/2009-2010, dated 30.4.2010 is required to be set aside, accordingly, it is set aside and MR.No.1/2010-11 entered consequent to said order is also set aside. While doing so, the Tahsildar of Anekal Taluk is directed to restore katha of land bearing Sy.Nos.14/2, 16 and 35/9 of H.Hosahalli village, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District, to its original position as it stood earlier to 30.4.2010 and the rights of the parties with reference to aforesaid revenue entry shall be subject to the result of RSA.Nos.277 and 278 of 2015 pending on the file of this Court.
With such observations, these writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE nd/-
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

Sri Pedda Reddy And Others vs The Assistant Commissioner And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
29 May, 2019
Judges
  • S N Satyanarayana