PANDURANG Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P. No.103421/2023 is filed assailing the orders at Annexures-Q, P & N, wherein a decision has been taken to enter the name of the 6th respondent in the revenue records of the land bearing Sy.No.244/5 measuring 34 guntas; and W.P. No.104839/2021 is filed challenging the order passed by the JDLR, wherein 11-E Sketch on the basis of which sale deed was executed in favour of the 6th respondent - Dileep in respect of the aforesaid proeprty has been set aside.

(2.) The petitioners in W.P. No.103421/2023 claim to have purchased the land bearing Sy.No.244 under four different sale deeds on various dates to the extent of 1 acre 15 guntas out out 5 acres 19 guntas. It appears that a portion of the land measuring 34 guntas has been purchased by the 6th respondent - Dileep in the very same survey number based on the 11-E Sketch. Challenging the said 11-E sketch and the survey map prepared, the petitioners had filed an appeal before the Deputy Director of Land Records, who had rejected the same. The said order was set aside by the Joint Director of Land Records, Belagavi and 11-E sketch prepared in respect of 34 guntas of land on the basis of which sale deed was executed in favour of the 6th respondent - Dileep was set aside. In the meanwhile, a decision was taken to mutate the name of the 6th respondent - Dileep in respect of the land bearing Sy.No.244/5 measuring 34 guntas and the same was questioned by the petitioner before the Assistant Commissioner and also before the Deputy Commissioner unsuccessfully.

(3.) The material on record would go to show that the petitioners have already approached the Civil Court in O.S. No.288/2018, which was initially filed before the Civil Court, Chikkodi and subsequently transferred to the jurisdictional Civil Court at Nippani. It is trite that the revenue records of the land would be always subject to the result of the outcome of the Civil proceedings pending between the parties. Since the parties are already before the Civil Court in the suit which has been instituted by the petitioners herein in O.S. No.288/2018, it is not necessary for this Court to entertain these writ petitions and give a finding regarding correctness of the 11-E sketch or the entries, which are to be made in the revenue records of the lands in question pursuant to the registered sale deed executed on the basis of 11-E sketch.