01Facts
The petitioner challenged the order dated 20 March 2026 passed by the Regional Joint Director of Land Records, Mysuru Division, in Revision Petition Case No. REV/324/2025.
p. 6The dispute concerned a phodi of the land in question. The High Court noted that the order of respondent No. 3 contained no finding as to when the original phodi had been conducted or challenged before that authority.
pp. 6–702Issues
i.1. Whether the Regional Joint Director of Land Records’ order warranted interference where respondent No. 3 had accepted the petitioner’s appeal without a finding on when the original phodi was conducted and challenged.
pp. 6–7ii.2. Whether the writ petition could succeed in view of Section 56(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964.
p. 703Law Applied
The Court relied on Section 56(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, as a basis for declining interference in the writ petition.
p. 7No other statute, precedent, or separate legal test was identified in the order.
Provisions in the judgment · 1
Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 Section 56
04Reasoning
The Court found that respondent No. 3 had accepted the petitioner’s appeal despite the absence of a finding about when the original phodi had been conducted and challenged. It held that respondent No. 3 had therefore erred, and that respondent No. 2 had rightly interfered with that decision.
pp. 6–7In view of Section 56(3), the Court concluded that no interference with respondent No. 2’s order was called for.
pp. 6–705Holding
The Court dismissed the writ petition, leaving in place the Regional Joint Director of Land Records’ order dated 20 March 2026.
p. 7It granted no further relief.
p. 7Original Court PDF
UDAYA KvsSTATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
