Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 4 DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 7000 OF 2026 (GM-ST/RN)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. VARALAKSHMI
W/O. N.T. DANANJAYA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
NO. 48, 3RD CROSS, 5TH MAIN,
PARVATHINAGAR,
PEENYA SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES
BENGALURU - 560 058
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SURENDRA KUMAR N., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SUB REGISTRAR
NO. 455, "MASTI ARCADE"
50 FEET ROAD, LAGGERE MAIN ROAD,
NEAR LAGGERE CIRCLE,
BENGALURU - 560 058
…RESPONDENT
Digitally signed
by
SHARADAVANI
B
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR
DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO DELETE THE EC
ENTRY DATED 27-09-2012 VIDE REGISTRATION DOCUMENT
NO. PNY-1-0540-2012-13 STORED IN C.D. NO. PNYD523
DATED 27-09-2012 IN THE OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
RAJAJINAGAR (PEENYA) IN PAGES NO. 1 TO 10 VIDE
PROPERTY BEARING N. 48, WARD NO. 41, ASSESSMENT NO.
152 WITHIN THE LIMITS OF BBMP LAGGER VILLAGE
YESHWANTHPUR, HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is seeking a mandamus against the
respondent to delete the EC entry dated 27.09.2012 vide
registration document No.PNY-1-0540-2012-13 and he is
f Rs.
also seeking a cost o 5,00,000/- from the respondent
for dereliction of duty and unnecessarily driven the
petitioner to approach this Court.
2. The petitioner contends that her husband had
instituted a suit for declaration and permanent injunction
in O.S. No.4094/2015 before the competent Civil Court
questioning the legality of a sale deed executed in favour
of defendant No.1. It is asserted that the said sale deed
had been brought into existence on the strength of a
General Power of Attorney (GPA) which, according to the
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
plaintiff, was fabricated and not executed by the true
owner. After full-fledged trial, the Civil Court, by judgment
and decree dated 31.10.2023, decreed the suit and
categorically held that the GPA relied upon by defendant
No.1 was a forged and fabricated document.
Consequently, the sale deed executed on the strength of
the said GPA was declared null and void and not binding
on the plaintiff.
3. The petitioner submits that despite the said
declaration by a competent Civil Court, the entry relating
to the impugned sale deed continues to be reflected in the
Encumbrance Certificate (EC) maintained in the office of
the respondent–Sub-Registrar. In this regard, the
petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent–
Sub-Registrar requesting deletion of the entry relating to
the sale deed which had already been declared void by the
Civil Court. However, the respondent–Sub-Registrar,
instead of acting upon the request, issued an endorsement
stating that unless the petitioner furnishes a judgment
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
rendered by a competent Civil Court declaring the
document to be invalid, the entry in the Encumbrance
Certificate cannot be deleted.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate,
appearing for the respondent, sought to justify the
issuance of the endorsement at Annexure-G. It was
submitted that at the time when the petitioner approached
the office of the Sub-Registrar seeking deletion of the
entry, the petitioner had not furnished a copy of the
judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.4094/2015.
According to the learned AGA, in the absence of the
judgment of a competent Civil Court declaring the sale
deed to be null and void, the Sub-Registrar could not have
taken steps to alter or delete the entry reflected in the
Encumbrance Certificate. Therefore, the respondent issued
the endorsement indicating that unless the petitioner
produces the judgment rendered by a competent Civil
Court, the request for deletion of the entry could not be
considered.
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
5. The submission made on behalf of the respondent
cannot be accepted. The material placed before this Court
clearly indicates that the petitioner had submitted a
representation dated 06.11.2025 before the respondent–
Sub-Registrar seeking deletion of the impugned entry, and
in the said representation there was a specific reference to
the judgment and decree rendered in O.S. No.4094/2015.
The respondent ought to have taken note of the said
reference and called upon the petitioner to furnish a copy
of the judgment, instead of mechanically issuing the
endorsement declining to consider the request. In the
present writ proceedings, the petitioner has produced a
true copy of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.
No.4094/2015, which unmistakably declares that the sale
deed relied upon by defendant No.1 was executed on the
basis of a forged GPA and therefore stands declared null
and void.
6. Once a competent Civil Court has rendered such a
declaration, the respondent–Sub-Registrar is duty-bound
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
to take cognizance of the said judgment and give effect to
the same while maintaining the registration records. The
continued reflection of the impugned document in the
Encumbrance Certificate, despite the declaration by the
Civil Court, cannot be sustained.
7. Though the conduct of the respondent–Sub-
Registrar in ignoring the judgment of the Civil Court is not
appreciable, learned AGA has requested this Court to take
a lenient view and not to impose costs on the concerned
authority. Taking note of the said submission, this Court
refrains from imposing costs, but deems it appropriate to
issue necessary directions. Accordingly, this Court
proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
i. The writ petition stands allowed;
ii. The present writ petition shall be treated as a
representation submitted by the petitioner
before the respondent–Sub-Registrar seeking
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
necessary correction in the registration
records in light of the judgment and decree
passed in O.S. No.4094/2015;
iii. The respondent–Sub-Registrar shall take
cognizance of the findings recorded and
decree passed in O.S. No.4094/2015 and take
necessary steps in accordance with law to
reflect the effect of the said judgment in the
Encumbrance Register / relevant register
maintained in the office of the Sub-Registrar,
including deletion of the impugned entry
relating to the sale deed that has been
declared null and void.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
HDK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 4 DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 7000 OF 2026 (GM-ST/RN)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. VARALAKSHMI
W/O. N.T. DANANJAYA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
NO. 48, 3RD CROSS, 5TH MAIN,
PARVATHINAGAR,
PEENYA SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES
BENGALURU - 560 058
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SURENDRA KUMAR N., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SUB REGISTRAR
NO. 455, "MASTI ARCADE"
50 FEET ROAD, LAGGERE MAIN ROAD,
NEAR LAGGERE CIRCLE,
BENGALURU - 560 058
…RESPONDENT
Digitally signed
by
SHARADAVANI
B
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR
DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO DELETE THE EC
ENTRY DATED 27-09-2012 VIDE REGISTRATION DOCUMENT
NO. PNY-1-0540-2012-13 STORED IN C.D. NO. PNYD523
DATED 27-09-2012 IN THE OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
RAJAJINAGAR (PEENYA) IN PAGES NO. 1 TO 10 VIDE
PROPERTY BEARING N. 48, WARD NO. 41, ASSESSMENT NO.
152 WITHIN THE LIMITS OF BBMP LAGGER VILLAGE
YESHWANTHPUR, HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is seeking a mandamus against the
respondent to delete the EC entry dated 27.09.2012 vide
registration document No.PNY-1-0540-2012-13 and he is
f Rs.
also seeking a cost o 5,00,000/- from the respondent
for dereliction of duty and unnecessarily driven the
petitioner to approach this Court.
2. The petitioner contends that her husband had
instituted a suit for declaration and permanent injunction
in O.S. No.4094/2015 before the competent Civil Court
questioning the legality of a sale deed executed in favour
of defendant No.1. It is asserted that the said sale deed
had been brought into existence on the strength of a
General Power of Attorney (GPA) which, according to the
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
plaintiff, was fabricated and not executed by the true
owner. After full-fledged trial, the Civil Court, by judgment
and decree dated 31.10.2023, decreed the suit and
categorically held that the GPA relied upon by defendant
No.1 was a forged and fabricated document.
Consequently, the sale deed executed on the strength of
the said GPA was declared null and void and not binding
on the plaintiff.
3. The petitioner submits that despite the said
declaration by a competent Civil Court, the entry relating
to the impugned sale deed continues to be reflected in the
Encumbrance Certificate (EC) maintained in the office of
the respondent–Sub-Registrar. In this regard, the
petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent–
Sub-Registrar requesting deletion of the entry relating to
the sale deed which had already been declared void by the
Civil Court. However, the respondent–Sub-Registrar,
instead of acting upon the request, issued an endorsement
stating that unless the petitioner furnishes a judgment
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
rendered by a competent Civil Court declaring the
document to be invalid, the entry in the Encumbrance
Certificate cannot be deleted.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate,
appearing for the respondent, sought to justify the
issuance of the endorsement at Annexure-G. It was
submitted that at the time when the petitioner approached
the office of the Sub-Registrar seeking deletion of the
entry, the petitioner had not furnished a copy of the
judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.4094/2015.
According to the learned AGA, in the absence of the
judgment of a competent Civil Court declaring the sale
deed to be null and void, the Sub-Registrar could not have
taken steps to alter or delete the entry reflected in the
Encumbrance Certificate. Therefore, the respondent issued
the endorsement indicating that unless the petitioner
produces the judgment rendered by a competent Civil
Court, the request for deletion of the entry could not be
considered.
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
5. The submission made on behalf of the respondent
cannot be accepted. The material placed before this Court
clearly indicates that the petitioner had submitted a
representation dated 06.11.2025 before the respondent–
Sub-Registrar seeking deletion of the impugned entry, and
in the said representation there was a specific reference to
the judgment and decree rendered in O.S. No.4094/2015.
The respondent ought to have taken note of the said
reference and called upon the petitioner to furnish a copy
of the judgment, instead of mechanically issuing the
endorsement declining to consider the request. In the
present writ proceedings, the petitioner has produced a
true copy of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.
No.4094/2015, which unmistakably declares that the sale
deed relied upon by defendant No.1 was executed on the
basis of a forged GPA and therefore stands declared null
and void.
6. Once a competent Civil Court has rendered such a
declaration, the respondent–Sub-Registrar is duty-bound
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
to take cognizance of the said judgment and give effect to
the same while maintaining the registration records. The
continued reflection of the impugned document in the
Encumbrance Certificate, despite the declaration by the
Civil Court, cannot be sustained.
7. Though the conduct of the respondent–Sub-
Registrar in ignoring the judgment of the Civil Court is not
appreciable, learned AGA has requested this Court to take
a lenient view and not to impose costs on the concerned
authority. Taking note of the said submission, this Court
refrains from imposing costs, but deems it appropriate to
issue necessary directions. Accordingly, this Court
proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
i. The writ petition stands allowed;
ii. The present writ petition shall be treated as a
representation submitted by the petitioner
before the respondent–Sub-Registrar seeking
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:13346
WP No. 7000 of 2026
HC-KAR
necessary correction in the registration
records in light of the judgment and decree
passed in O.S. No.4094/2015;
iii. The respondent–Sub-Registrar shall take
cognizance of the findings recorded and
decree passed in O.S. No.4094/2015 and take
necessary steps in accordance with law to
reflect the effect of the said judgment in the
Encumbrance Register / relevant register
maintained in the office of the Sub-Registrar,
including deletion of the impugned entry
relating to the sale deed that has been
declared null and void.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
HDK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34