Revenue authorities cannot refuse to implement a partition decree for want of an 11-E sketch.

The petitioners, plaintiffs and decree-holders in a partition suit, challenged an order of the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Athani, in Execution Petition No. 66/2020.

The Executing Court accepted the Tahsildar’s position that the final decree in FDP No. 45/2018 could not be given effect without an 11-E sketch, which the petitioners had not produced.

The petitioners sought certiorari under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution to quash that order.

1. Whether revenue authorities may decline to give effect to a final partition decree solely because an 11-E sketch has not been produced.

2. Whether the Executing Court’s order accepting the Tahsildar’s stated inability should be quashed and reconsidered in light of the High Court’s prior rulings.

The Court relied on its coordinate Bench decisions, including W.P. No. 103193/2022 (disposed of on 11 October 2022), which considered the Director of Bhoomi and UPOR’s circular dated 14 November 2016.

Those authorities held that the requirement of a Form 11-E sketch is dispensed with where a competent civil court has passed a decree; the Court also noted that this approach was followed in W.P. No. 103777/2023 (disposed of on 11 September 2023).

The order in W.P. No. 103193/2022 also referred to the revenue authority’s obligation under Section 128 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act to effect mutation as specified by the decree.

The final decree in the partition proceedings was a decree of a competent civil court.

The Executing Court nevertheless accepted the Tahsildar’s report that implementation depended on production of an 11-E sketch.

Applying the coordinate Bench rulings and the 2016 circular, the High Court held that non-availability of the sketch alone could not justify the revenue authorities’ refusal to give effect to the decree.

The Executing Court therefore had to reconsider the petitioners’ request in light of those authorities.

The petitioners were directed to furnish copies of the cited High Court orders to the Executing Court; the writ petition was disposed of.