High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Umesh vs State Of Karnataka on 18 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri Umesh vs State Of Karnataka on 18 November, 2010
Author: B.S.Patil
WP 34698/2010

EN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY or NOVEMBER, _2.o':;»o:  it 

BEFORE V
THE E-ION'BLE MR.JUsn:;:*gi'B'.'s    V
W.P.No.34-696/201:0   - = i' 
BETWEEN: V   V V' 

Sri Umesh,  

S/o late Chikkamuniyappfl,' 

Aged about 30 years,    

Residing at Chelleghatta Vi11_._2.ge;--.. '

Kengeri Hobli,    V     

Barlgalore South3.Ta'£iéd{,V .    _V   
Banga1aore--'74;."   '      PETITIONER

(By Sri  audit'  it

Sri C.Mal1ika1junaiah. ;'gavg.:..t_ahsen."£j'"'V
AND: V i 'V i

1. State of Ka:iiata1«;a.',«. _
Repqfay its Chief'ASecretaary,

 '.    ..... .r

V Ba.nga1ore. _ 

2. "'R_ev¢nue Secretary,
Governnien t7._o£" Karnataka.
_ Vidhanzif Sotidha.
V  Bangalore.

 Tahsildar,
Baiigalore South Taluk.

'  K;G.Road. Bangalore.  RESPONDENTS

‘V ‘ = A *;s§}i R.Kumaz’, HCGP)

This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 8: 227 of the
Constitution of India praying to direct the respondent No.3 to

WP 34696/2010
2

delete the entry made in Co1.11 in RTC.Extract in respect of the
land in Sy.No.58/ 3 measuring 1 acre 26 guntas situated at
Chelleghatta Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South .-Taluk,
vide Annexure–B,

This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing«’tl’1£s:

the Court made the following:

ORDER –

1. Learned Government PleaderA:”.tai<.es
respondents.

2. Though this matter 1seVll”éaii.e;:* “there is no

representation for the petitioner o11~occ_asions.

3. Petitionenis qiiestidnghg thelllentry made in the RTC in
Column mentiloningy’lthe,.factum of an interim order of

stay dated 2V5;–41%1;2oo5 hp,-dss.éd by 1 Addl. Civil Judge [Sr.Dn.),

:_.~”‘BVangriloreE___lR’u.ral in O.S.No.2720/2005. Even if the

V.peti.tioneAr”visaggrieved by the said entry, the remedy for the

petitioner is3ft_oV..l3’ prefer an appeal in accordance with the

‘ provisioilssuopf the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Writ petition

therefore cannot be entertained.

Hence. the writ petition is dismissed reserving liberty to

H etitioner to avail the alternative remedy.

WP 34696/2010

5. Learned Government Pleader Mr. R.Kurnar appearing for
the respondents is permitted to fife memo of appearancejv-..riTthin

three weeks from today.

Q.» A

L?

W

a.«,2>–

Y