Karnataka HC Leaves Revenue Entries For 3 Sites In Puttaiah’s Daughter’s Name, Subject To Pending Suit

The petitioner and Sri Puttaiah were parties to a pending civil suit, O.S. No. 3535/2013.

Revenue entries for three sites had stood in Puttaiah’s name; after his death, the entries were mutated in favour of the fifth respondent, one of his daughters.

The petitioner challenged that mutation, contending that the authorities had earlier rejected the fifth respondent’s mutation application and could not subsequently reverse that decision without statutory review power.

The Court noted that the petitioner’s claimed interest in the sites remained to be determined in the pending suit.

The petition invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

The Court did not identify or apply a specific statutory provision or precedent governing mutation or review.

It treated the petitioner’s asserted interest in the sites as a matter for determination in the pending civil suit and made the fifth respondent’s right to the sites and to the revenue entries subject to the outcome of that suit.

Although the Court recognised the question whether the third respondent had impermissibly revisited the earlier rejection of the mutation application, it did not decide that question.

Instead, it held that the petitioner could not, at that stage, assert an established interest in the sites because that issue was before the civil court.

Given that Puttaiah was the undisputed kathedar when he died, the Court found no basis to interfere with the mutation in this petition, while preserving the effect of any favourable determination for the petitioner in the suit.

It directed, in effect, that the fifth respondent’s rights in the sites and the corresponding revenue entries would remain subject to any orders in the petitioner’s favour in O.S. No. 3535/2013.