Social Icons

Wednesday, January 6, 2016


The plaintiff mother who is Gowramma owned a property and she died intestate leaving behind her one son who is the plaintiff and the 1st defendant her husband, on her death the 1st defendant had given declaration before the revenue authority to change the Khata in the name of the plaintiff and the mutation was effected accordingly and the revenue records stood in the name of plaintiff for long period of time. The plaintiff case is that the 1st defendant entered into 2nd marriage and had children i.e., defendant Nos. 2 to 5 and they denied the ownership of the plaintiff.

The trial court after consideration of evidence dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff. The lower appellant court held that plaintiff and 1st defendant being class 1 heir and entitled to half share in the property. The plaintiff preferred 2nd appeal and the High Court of Karnataka allowed the same by setting aside the judgement of the lower appellant court. Aggrieved by the High Court order the defendant preferred appeal to the Supreme Court.

Whether declaration before the revenue authorities to change the khata is a relinquishment of right over the property, whether the mutation entries convey the title

The mutation entries do not convey or extinguish any title and those entries are relevant only for the propose of collection of land revenue. The declaration provided by the 1st defendant for change of katha/mutation does not divest himself from the title and possession and his share in suit schedule property.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in H.Lakshmaiah Reddy and others Vs L.Venkatesh Reddy set-aside the judgement and decree of the High Court and the judgement and decree of the lower appellant Court was restored and the appeals were allowed as per the orders.         

Prepared by: S. Hemanth