Sri A M Mayanna v. Sri Mayiga @ Kuntegowda

NC:(2026:KHC:1677( WP(No.(33046(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(12 (DAY(OF(JANUARY,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(S(SUNIL(DUTT(YADAV( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(33046(OF(2025((LA-RES)( BETWEEN:(( (

1., SRI,A,M,MAYANNA,

S/O,M,MADAIAH,,

AGED,ABOUT,57,YEARS,, ALSO,R/AT,APL,STORES,, KEMPEGOWDA,SCHOOL,ROAD,, GANGANNA,BADAANE,,

SANNAKI,BAYALU,, VRUSHABHAVATHI,NAGARA, VRUSHABHAVATHI,NAGARA,WARD,, BANGALORE,-,560,079,

,

2., SRI,A,M,KUMARA, Digitally S/O,M,MADAIAH,, signedtiby AGED,ABOUT,53,YEARS,, VIJAYA0P R/AT,ANKANATHAPURA,VILLAGE,,Location: HIGH0COURT ATHAGUR,HOBLI,,MADDUR,TALUK, OF MANDYA,DISTRICT,-,571,428,KARNATAKA ,

3., SRI,A,M,RAVI, S/O,M,MADAIAH,, AGED,ABOUT,49,YEARS, R/AT,ANKANATHAPURA,VILLAGE,, ATHAGURU,HOBLI,,MADDUR,TALUK, MANDYA,DISTRICT,-,571,428, …,PETITIONERS, (BY,SRI.,DEVARAJ,A,S.,,ADVOCATE), NC:(2026:KHC:1677( WP(No.(33046(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( AND:( ( , SRI,MAYIGA,@,KUNTEGOWDA, R/AT,ANKANATHAPURA,VILLAGE,, ATHAGURU,HOBLI,,MADDUR,TALUK, MANDYA,DISTRICT,-,571,428, (THIS,PERSON,IS,THE,GRAND,FATHER,OF, PETITIONER,HE,DIED,WAY,BACK,TO,1946,,BUT, REVENUE,RECORDS,STANDS,IN,HIS,NAME,,AWARD, WAS,PASSED,IN,HIS,NAME,EVEN,THOUGH,HE,DEAD), ,

1., A,M,MAYANNA, S/O,LATE,A,M,MADAIAH,, AGED,ABOUT,62,YEARS,, R/AT,ANKANATHAPURA,VILLAGE,, ATHAGUR,HOBLI,,MADDUR,TALUK, MANDYA,DISTRICT,-,571,428, ,

2., ASSISTANT,EXECUTIVE,ENGINEER, CAUVERY,NEERAVARI,NIGAMA,LTD.,, V.C.,NALA,DIVISION,,MADDUR,,, MANDYA,DISTRICT,-,571,428, ,

3., THE,SPECIAL,LAND,ACQUISITION,OFFICER, MANDYA,,MANDYA,DISTRICT,-,571,428, ,

4., THE,PRL.,SECRETARY, REVENUE,DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU,-,560,001., ,

5., THE,DEPUTY,COMMISSIONER, MANDYA, MANDYA,DISTRICT,-,571,428, …,RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,HARISH,A.S.,,AGA,FOR,R3,TO,R5),

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS IN LAC NO. 38/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MANDYA AND A) ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE FORM OF WRIT TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 27.01.2020 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MANDYA IN LAC.NO.38/2020 UNDER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

ORAL ORDER

Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent nos.3 to 5.

The present petition has been filed calling in question the correctness of the order passed in LAC 38/2018 by the II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mandya.

¶2Learned counsel for petitioner submits that respondent no.1 who was the claimant in the reference proceedings in LAC 38/2018 has suppressed the facts and obtained an order.

¶3In LAC 38/2018, the trial court has allowed the reference petition under Section of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and has enhanced the market value.

¶4The petitioner would submit that the claimant has misrepresented before the Reference Court and has not brought to the notice of the Reference Court the proceedings in O.S.No.3/2013 which is still pending between the petitioners and respondent no.2.

¶5It is further submitted that an application under Order 6 Rule 17 was filed seeking to amend the prayer in the suit. It is submitted that the order passed is on misrepresentation and amounts to fraudulent order obtained by the private respondents by misrepresenting the facts and on the basis of suppression of material facts.

¶6Learned AGA would submit that the question of fraud is a mixed question of fact and law and that it would be appropriate for the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 74 of the New Act.

¶7There is a distinction between maintainability and entertainability. No doubt, the writ petition is maintainable before this court, however taking note of dense factual matrix and allegation of fraud, the appropriate remedy would be to

remit the petitioner to challenge orders passed under Section 64 by way of appeal under Section 74 of the Act.

¶8No doubt, the petitioners submit that they were not parties in the reference proceedings, however Section 74 provides for any person aggrieved by the award could file an appeal.

¶9Taking note that the petitioners were not aware of the proceedings, it would be appropriate that the aspect of limitation be taken note of appropriately in the event appeal is filed.

¶10All contentions of the petitioners regarding fraud and criminal acts stated to have been committed by the private respondents are kept open to be agitated before the appropriate authorities. The contention of absence of knowledge of the petitioners of the proceedings in the Reference Court may be taken note of appropriately considering that petitioners were not parties in the proceedings in the Reference Court.

¶11Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. All contentions are kept open. Petitioners are at liberty to take appropriate proceedings as is permissible in law for redressal of their grievance.

¶12Learned counsel for petitioners submit that private respondents have filed Execution proceedings in Ex.No.52/2021 and there is an apprehension that in such proceedings the private respondents may withdraw the compensation amount.

¶13It is made clear that the Executing Court is restrained from passing any orders so as to release the amount in terms of the order in LAC 38/2018 for a period of four weeks from today.

Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

NP