LAWS(KAR)-2023-7-101

H.M.PRASANNA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On July 03, 2023
H.M.Prasanna Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of impugned orders passed by respondent Nos.3 and 2 (vide Annexures-H and K to the writ petition respectively), respondent Nos.2 and 3 have ordered the property which are the subject matter of the writ petition i.e. 2 guntas and 3 guntas of land in Sy.No.40/P1 of Hirekanavangala Village, Ajjampura Taluk, should be mutated in the name of respondent Nos.5 to 9 herein. The same is ordered on the basis of two sale deeds executed by father of the petitioner herein. Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the properties which have been ordered to be mutated in the name of respondent Nos.5 to 9 is different from what has been sold by his father to the father of respondent Nos.5 to 9. However, it is noticed that though the petitioner admits the execution of the sale deeds in the instant writ petition, has denied the execution of the sale deeds in favour of father of respondent Nos.5 to 9 before respondent Nos.3 and 2.

(3.) Respondent Nos.3 and 2, based on the documents produced have come to the conclusion that prima facie they show that 2 guntas and 3 guntas of land have been sold in favour of father of respondent Nos.5 to 9 and they are the lands to which the revenue entries are presently ordered to be mutated in the names of respondent Nos.5 to 9. Under the circumstances, I do not see any error in the impugned orders. If the petitioner is of the opinion that the sale deeds are not executed in respect of the lands which are the subject matter of the impugned orders and that he is the owner of the said land, it is needless to state that he is always at liberty to approach the Civil Court in the manner known to law.