IN THE COURT OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

DODDABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION

R.A. NO. 310 /2019-2020

1. Appellant Sri. K.V. Muniyappa

S/o Late Venkataramaiah
Aged about 77 Years,
Residing of Kembaliganahalli Village
Nandagudi Hobli
Hosakote Taluk,
Bangalore Rural District-562114.

V/S

Respondents 1. Thasildar,
Hoskote Taluk,
Hoskote.

2. Sri. K.N. Subramani

S/o Narasappa
Aged about 53 Years
Resident of Kembaliganahalli Village
Nandagudi Hobli
Hosakote Taluk,
Bangalore Rural District-562114.

Under Section 49, read with 136(2) of Karnataka Land Revenue

Act, The Appellant above named prefers this appeal against the order
passed by the Thasildar, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District in
ordering Katha in Mutation No. MR 25/ 2004-2005, dated 31-12-2004
with regard to Survey No. 86 /2 measuring 18 Guntas out of 36 Guntas
of ancestral property. Though the Property described in Sy. No. 86/2 is
ancestral property inherited from forefathers, the Respondent No.2 has
illegally got the Katha Transferred in his name hence, the Appellant has
approached this Hon’ble Court to call for entire records from the
Respondent No.1 and to set-aside the Mutation which is in favour of
Respondent No.2 restore in the name of Appellant and among other
grounds this appeal.

Facts of the case:

1
1. The Appellant most humbly submits that originally the land
bearing Sy No.86/2 measuring totally 1 Acre 14 Guntas of Land is
Ancestral Property which was inherited from their Ancestor late
Venkataramaiah, after the demise of the late Venkataramaiah the
Property was sub-divided among his three Children, they are late
K.V. Maadhu, K.V. Muniyappa, K.V. Nagaraju each 18 Guntas.
Out of 1 Acre 14 Guntas Sri. K.V. Nagaraju got his part of 18
Guntas of Land transferred in his name. But Before late K.V.
Maadhu and K.V. Muniyappa could get Katha transferred in their
name each of 18 Guntas of Land of remaining 36 Guntas one Mr.
K.N. Subramani S/o Narasappa got Katha transferred in his name
illegally. When the Appellants went to collect RTC from Taluk
Office, it was to their utter shock that RTC appearing in the name
of Respondent No.2, when inquired about the Respondent No.2
over-powered and threatened to the Appellants with their dire
consequences.

2. It is humbly submitted that since 3rd son of late Venkataramaiah

Sri. K.V. Nagaraju got Katha transferred by virtue of Division in
the Ancestral Property, now the Division which is supposed to be
in the name of late K.V. Maadhu and K.V. Muniyappa Katha
should be transferred in their name. Since Respondent No.2 has got
Katha transferred in his name illegally now Mutation which is in
favour of Respondent No.2 is liable to be set-aside and Katha
should be transferred back in the name of Appellant and his
Brother.

3. It is submitted that the Respondent No.1 without verifying the

Genealogical Tree of the Respondent No.2 has illegally transferred
the Katha who has no right whatsoever, and moreover the
Respondent No.2 is alien to the Appellant, he is neither one of the
brother with Appellant nor find root in the family of the Appellant,
thus has illegally got the Katha Transferred in his name as one of

2
 the legal heir and the RTC also shows that the said 36 Guntas of
Land was mutated in his name by virtue of Division ( Vibajane),
thus the act of the Respondent No.1 in transferring the Katha in the
name of Respondent No.2 is totally against the established
principles of Law thus the mutation in the favour of Respondent
No.2 is liable to be struck down.

4. The Appellant most humbly submits that the Respondent No.1

should have verified the Genealogy of the Respondent No.2 before
effecting the Mutation, thus not verifying the Genealogy of the
Respondent No.2 is grave error and it is illegal. Aggrieved by the
order of the Tahsildar who is Respondent No.1 the Appellant has
come before this Hon’ble Court in Appeal challenging the order
passed by the Respondent No.1 in MR 25/ 2004-2005, dated,
31-12-2004 with regard to Survey No.86 /2 measuring 18 Guntas
out of 36 Guntas of Land.

Grounds of Appeal:

1. The Appellant submits that the impugned mutation order passed by

the Respondent No.1 in favour of Respondent No.2 is illegal,
perverse, and arbitrary and same is opposed to Law. Hence said
illegal order is liable to be set aside.

2. The appellant submits that, while passing the impugned order the
Respondent No.1 has not followed the due procedure as
contemplated under law, he did not inspect the spot and not
considered the possession of the appellant and respondents. Hence
impugned order for change of Katha is liable to be set aside.

3. The appellant submits that the appellant is absolute owner of 18

Guntas Land of his Division bearing Sy. No. 86/2, the Appellant is
in Peaceful Possession and Enjoyment of the Property, since it is
joint family property inherited from his Father as Pavathi Varasu,
but the Respondent No2 who is stranger to the Appellant has got

3
 RTC transferred in his name illegally and the act of the
Respondent No.1 is also illegal in not verifying the details before
effecting Katha change, thus the Respondent No.2 has no manner
of right, title and possession over the property since it is Ancestral
Property, thus the name of Respondent No.2 in RTC which is
liable to be set aside.

4. The Appellant submits that the appellant is entitled get the said
property as Pavathi Varasu and earlier katha standing in the name
of Appellant’ Father when such being the state of affairs, the
Respondent No.2 has no right whatsoever to get Katha transferred
in his name and order of Respondent No.1 in passing an order of
Change of Katha is Illegal, baseless and liable to be set aside by
this Hon’ble Court.

5. The Appellant humbly submits that, illegal order recently came to

appellant’s knowledge, when he last went to take RTC from Taluk
office, immediately he is filing this appeal, hence appeal is in time
from the date of knowledge for abundant caution application under
Section 5 of Limitation Act is also filed for condonation of delay.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, the Appellant prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased
to call for the entire records from the Respondent No.1 in MR 25/ 2004-
2005, dated 31-12-2004 with regard to Survey No.86 /2 measuring 18
Guntas out of 36 Guntas of Land situated at Kembaliganahalli Village,
Nandagudi Hobli, Hoskote Taluk and delete the said mutation order and
the direct the Tahsildar, Hoskote Taluk to restore the Katha in favour of
Appellant as per the Division carried out by allowing this Appeal in ends
of Justice and Equity.

Place: Doddaballapur
Date: 26:11:2019 Appellant

4
 IN THE COURT OF THE ASST. COMMISSIONER

DODDABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION

R.A. NO. /2019-2020

Appellant Sri. K.V. Muniyappa

V/S

Respondents Thasildar, Hoskote Taluk & Another

STAY APPLICATION UDNER SECTION 55 OF THE

KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, R/W SECTION 151 OF
CPC.

The appellant above named most humbly submits and state as follows.

5
 That for the reasons mentioned in the accompanying affidavit of
the appellant that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to Stay the
impugned Mutation order passed by the Respondent No. in favour of
Respondent No.2 till pending disposal of the Appeal, by allowing this
Application, in the ends of Justice and Equity.

Place: Doddaballapur
Date: 26-11-2019 Appellant

IN THE COURT OF THE ASSTISTANT COMMISSIONER

DODDABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION

R.A. No. /2019-2020

Appellant Sri. K.V. Muniyappa

V/S

Respondents Thasildar, Hoskote Taluk & Another

AFFIDAVIT

I, Sri. K.V. Muniyappa S/o Late Venkataramaiah , the appellant in the

above case do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows:

1. I swear that, I am the appellant in the above I have filed the above
appeal against the order passed by the Tahsildar for change of
Katha in favour of Respondent No. 2. The appeal averments may

6
 be read as part and parcel of this Affidavit to avoid repetition of
facts.
2. The Appellant most humbly submits that originally the land
bearing Sy No.86/2 measuring totally 1 Acre 14 Guntas of Land is
Ancestral Property which was inherited from their Ancestor late
Venkataramaiah, after the demise of the late Venkataramaiah the
Property was sub-divided among his three Children, they are late
K.V. Maadhu, K.V. Muniyappa, K.V. Nagaraju each 18 Guntas.
Out of 1 Acre 14 Guntas Sri. K.V. Nagaraju got his part of 18
Guntas of Land transferred in his name. But Before late K.V.
Maadhu and K.V. Muniyappa could get Katha transferred in their
name each of 18 Guntas of Land of remaining 36 Guntas one Mr.
K.N. Subramani S/o Narasappa got Katha transferred in his name
illegally. When the Appellants went to collect RTC from Taluk
Office, it was to their utter shock that RTC appearing in the name
of Respondent No.2, when inquired about the Respondent No.2
over-powered and threatened to the Appellants with their dire
consequences.

3. It is humbly submitted that since 3rd son of late Venkataramaiah

Sri. K.V. Nagaraju got Katha transferred by virtue of Division in
the Ancestral Property, now the Division which is supposed to be
in the name of late K.V. Maadhu and K.V. Muniyappa Katha
should be transferred in their name. Since Respondent No.2 has got
Katha transferred in his name illegally now Mutation which is in
favour of Respondent No.2 is liable to be set-aside and Katha
should be transferred back in the name of Appellant and his
Brother.

4. It is submitted that the Respondent No.1 without verifying the

Genealogical Tree of the Respondent No.2 has illegally transferred
the Katha who has no right whatsoever, and moreover the
Respondent No.2 is alien to the Appellant, he is neither one of the

7
 brother with Appellant nor find root in the family of the Appellant,
thus has illegally got the Katha Transferred in his name as one of
the legal heir and the RTC also shows that the said 36 Guntas of
Land was mutated in his name by virtue of Division ( Vibajane),
thus the act of the Respondent No.1 in transferring the Katha in the
name of Respondent No.2 is totally against the established
principles of Law thus the mutation in the favour of Respondent
No.2 is liable to be struck down.

5. I swear that by taking undue advantage of said order the 2 nd

Respondent is going to dispose of the Property, if this Hon’ble
Court not does not stay the impugned order then it will dispose of
the Property which will create multiplicity of proceedings. I am
having good case on merits.

6. I swear that, if the application is not allowed and stay not granted, I
will be put to great hardship and injury which can’t be
compensated by any other means, on the other hand there will be
no harm to other side.

WHEREFORE, I pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to allow the

application as prayed therein, in the ends of Justice and Equity.

I do swear accordingly.

Place: Doddaballapur

Date: 26-11-2019 Deponent

Identified by me

Advocate

8
 IN THE COURT OF THE ASSTISTANT COMMISSIONER

DODDABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION

R.A. No. /2019-2020

Appellant Sri. K.V. Muniyappa

V/S

Respondents Thasildar, Hoskote Taluk & Another

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT

The Appellant above named most humbly submit and state as follows:

That for the reasons mentioned in the accompanying Affidavit of

the Appellant, that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to condone the
delay if any while the above appeal and permit her to contest the above
matter by allowing this Application in the ends of Justice and Equity.

Place: Doddaballapur

Date: 27-11-2019 Advocate for Appellant

9
 IN THE COURT OF THE ASSTISTANT COMMISSIONER

DODDABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION

R.A. No. /2019-2020

Appellant Sri. K.V. Muniyappa

V/S

Respondents Thasildar, Hoskote Taluk & Another

AFFIDAVIT

I, K.V. Muniyappa S/o Late Venkataramaiah, the appellant in the above

case do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows:

1. I swear that, I am the appellant in the above, I have filed the above
appeal against the order passed by Tahsildar for change of Katha in
favour of Respondent No.2. The appeal averments may be read as
part and parcel of this Affidavit to avoid repetition of facts.

2. The Appellant most humbly submits that originally the land

bearing Sy No.86/2 measuring totally 1 Acre 14 Guntas of Land is
Ancestral Property which was inherited from their Ancestor late
Venkataramaiah, after the demise of the late Venkataramaiah the
Property was sub-divided among his three Children, they are late
K.V. Maadhu, K.V. Muniyappa, K.V. Nagaraju each 18 Guntas.
Out of 1 Acre 14 Guntas Sri. K.V. Nagaraju got his part of 18
Guntas of Land transferred in his name. But Before late K.V.
Maadhu and K.V. Muniyappa could get Katha transferred in their
name each of 18 Guntas of Land of remaining 36 Guntas one Mr.

10
 K.N. Subramani S/o Narasappa got Katha transferred in his name
illegally. When the Appellants went to collect RTC from Taluk
Office, it was to their utter shock that RTC appearing in the name
of Respondent No.2, when inquired about the Respondent No.2
over-powered and threatened to the Appellants with their dire
consequences.

3. It is submitted that Appellant has preferred this Appeal against the

Respondents to cancel the Katha and restore in the name of the
Appellant. I have a good case on merits, since I did not know the
change of Katha I came know which I took RTC in October 2019
from Taluk office, since then I applied various documents from
Taluk Office.

4. I swear that, if the application is not allowed and Condone the

delay if any, I will be put to great hardship and injury which cannot
be compensated by any other means, on the other hand there will
be no harm to other side.

WHEREFORE, I pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to allow the

application and Condone Delay, in the ends of Justice and Equity.

I do swear accordingly.

Place: Doddaballapur
Date:27-11-2019 Deponent

Identified by me

Advocate

11