LAWS(KAR)-2025-7-278

B. CHANDRASHEKAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On July 09, 2025
B. Chandrashekar Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, petitioners are assailing the order dtd. 1/12/2015 (Annexure-N) passed by the respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner in Revision Petition No.165/2015-16, wherein, the order dtd. 30/6/2015 (Annexure-M) passed by the respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner in Case No.R.A.(BE)122/2010-11 has been set- aside.

(2.) The facts in nutshell for adjudication of this petition are that the father of the petitioners 1 to 5 viz. Subbaiah was the owner of the land bearing Survey No.4 of Thubarahalli Village, Bengaluru East Taluk to an extent of 4 acre 32 guntas. The said Subbaiah had sold the land to an extent of 2 acres out of 4 acre 32 guntas in favour of Hanumanthappa, father of the respondents 5 to 9 as per registered Sale Deed dtd. 22/11/1937 (Annexure-A). Thereafter, again the said Subbaiah, sold the land to an extent of 1 acre 6 guntas in favour of the aforesaid Hanumantappa as per registered Sale deed dtd. 15/1/1956 (Annexure-B) and on the very same day, Subbaiah had sold another extent of land measuring 1 acre 6 guntas in favour of one Munishamappa, brother of Hanumanthappa as per the registered Sale Deed dtd. 15/1/1956 (Annexure-C). It is stated in the petition that the father of the petitioner viz., Subbaiah in all, sold an extent of 4 acre 12 guntas as per aforementioned registered Sale Deeds and retained the land to an extent of 20 guntas for himself. The father of the petitioners viz., Subbaiah died and thereafter, the petitioners are in cultivation of the land in question. It is also stated that, during the year-2010, respondents 5 to 9 have made an attempt to interfere with the possession of the petitioners based on the revenue entries made in MR No.4/1980-81 dtd. 29/9/1980 made by the respondent No.4-Tahsildar to an extent of 2 acre 32 guntas including the 20 guntas of the land belonging to the petitioners. Thereafter, the petitioners 1 to 5, have challenged the same before the respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner in Case No. R.A.(BE)122/2010-11, claiming right in respect of 20 guntas of land which has been retained by the father of the petitioners 1 to 5.

(3.) It is also averred in the writ petition that the respondents 5 to 9 have refused to give share to the family members of Munishamappa, resulting in filing of suit by the children of Munishamappa in Original Suit No.4756 of 2005, seeking partition and separate possession in respect of the subject land and the said suit came to be dismissed, by judgment and decree dtd. 16/10/2009 (Annexure-E). It is also stated that the Regular First Appeal No.133/2010 was filed by the children of Munishamppa before this Court, challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 16/10/2009 passed in Original Suit No.4756 of 2005 and the said appeal came to be dismissed on 19/8/2010 (Annexure-F).