V K SURESH KUMAR Vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is the writ petitioner who lost the battle before the learned single Judge in challenging the order of the Special Deputy Commissioner in proceedings dated 3-8-2007 wherein the Special Deputy Commissioner reversed the order of the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore North Sub-Division changing the mutation of the records but recorded the name of the appellant-writ petitioner in the mutation of the records with regard to an extent of 1 acre and 28 guntas in Sy. No. 38/3 situated at shivanahalli Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North (Addl.) Taluk.

(2.) THE common case of the contesting parties was that the impugned land belongs to the original landowner one Sri channarayappa and then inherited by his son sonnappa who is the grand-father of the petitioner. But in the year 1993 by proceedings dated 18-12-1993 of the Tahsildar the name of Sri Kakol Kempanna s/o Sonnappa was deleted, but on the other hand the contesting respondent's forefather whose name is also sonnappa got entered into the revenue records which gave rise for disputes before the revenue authorities. 2. 1 The Assistant Commissioner by proceedings dated 8-9-2006 set aside the order of the Tahsildar dated 18-12-1993 remitted the matter to the Tahsildar to hold a fresh de-novo enquiry and enter in the mutation records the correct name of the owners and occupants of the impugned land. 2. 2 The appellant-writ petitioner also placed reliance on the registered will dated 16-2-1996 executed by his grand-father in favour of the appellant-writ petitioner. After remand the Tahsildar, Bangalore North Taluk by proceedings dated 13-7-2004 entered the name of the appellant-writ petitioner which necessitated the contesting respondent to prefer an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore who by order dated 8-9-2006 confirmed the order of the Tahsildar dated 13-7-2004. Hence a revision was preferred by the Deputy Commissioner who by order dated 3-8-2007, placing reliance on the decision of the Full Bench in the case of C. N. Nagendra Singh v. The Special Deputy commissioner, Bangalore District, reported in ilr 2002 Kar 2750 : (2002 AIR - Kant HCR 1894) reversed the order of the Assistant Commissioner dated 8-9-2006 referred to above holding that the revenue Court has no jurisdiction to enquire into and decide the dispute regarding the genuineness of the Will even for the limited purpose of making an entry in the mutation register as it falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. 2. 4 The Deputy Commissioner also held that until and unless the appellant-petitioner establishes his right and title over the property in question before the appropriate Civil court, the revenue authorities are disentitled to incorporate the name of the appellant-petitioner and the Assistant Commissioner had therefore committed serious error in confirming the order of the Tahsildar. Accordingly, the order of the Assistant Commissioner dated 8-9-2006 was set aside and ordered to restore khata of the land in Sy. No. 38/3 of shivanahalli Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North Additional Taluk in the joint names of the revision petitioner who is the contesting respondent herein as per MR. No. 22/92-93 and the mutation of the records in respect of the land in question in the name of the appellant-writ petitioner was cancelled. However, liberty was given to the parties to approach the Civil Court to establish their right and title over the land in question; and after the decision of the Civil Court they may approach the revenue authorities for the action as may be warranted in accordance with law. Aggrieved by the said order of the Special Deputy Commissioner dated 3-8-2007, the said order was challenged by the appellant-writ petitioner and the learned single judge, after hearing the rival contentions of the writ petitioner-appellant and the contesting respondent who reiterated their submissions which were made before the authorities below held as hereunder :

(3.) HENCE the present appeal.