MR K VARUN REDDY v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

5. MR. AMRUTH RAJ M S/O. H. MANJURAMASWAMY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 10/5, RAJATHANDHRI NILAYA, TALAGATPURA VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:3351 WP No. 12246 of 2025 HC-KAR BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU 560109 KARNATAKA, INDIA.

6. A. RAMAKRISHNA S/O. APPAJAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT TATGUNI VILLAGE, TATGUNI POST, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU 560062 KARNATAKA, INDIA

7. LATTUPALLI VINAY REDDY @ L. VINAY REDDY REPRESENTED BY HIS GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. JOHN M TITUS AGED MAJOR RESIDING AT 590, 10TH CROSS, 7TH BLOCK, WEST JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE SOUTH, BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU 560070 KARNATAKA, INDIA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B. RAVINDRANATH., AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI. H.S. DWARAKANATH., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. ARCHANA K.M., ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4; SRI. S.N. ASWATHANARAYAN., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. C. CHANDRASHEKAR., ADVOCATE FOR R7; VIDE ORDER DATED 31.07.2025; NOTICE TO R5 & R6 ARE DISPENSED WITH ) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:3351 WP No. 12246 of 2025 HC-KAR DECLARE THE SAID ACTION OF THE RESPONDENTS, IN ACCEPTING THE REGISTRATION OF THE SALE DEED VIDE DOCUMENT NO. RRN-1-00297-2025-26 IN THE BOOK NO. 1 OF THE REGISTRATION OFFICE AT RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR AS BEING APART FROM ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL BEING WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE REGISTRATION ACT, 1908 AND THE KARNATAKA REGISTRATION RULES, 1965 THEREUNDER AND CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE/CANCEL THE REGISTRATION OF THE SALE DEED REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO. RRN-1-00297- 2025-26. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner and another assert interest in an immovable property that is the subject matter of the Sale Deed dated 15.04.2025. The private respondents are parties to the Sale Deed either as vendor or confirming parties or purchasers. The petitioner's grievance is with the second respondent accepting - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:3351 WP No. 12246 of 2025 HC-KAR the Sale Deed presented for registration and completing the registration. The second respondent has registered this document in RRN-1-00297-2025-

2. This Court, on 29.08.2025, stating concise the petitioner's grievance as canvassed on his behalf, has called upon the learned Additional Government Advocate to secure instructions and subsequently the incumbent second respondent has filed affidavit dated 08.09.2025 stating as follows. "2. I submit that the petitioner had uploaded the draft Sale Deed for registration in the Website KAVERI-II on 14.04.2025 and accordingly, PRP number was allotted to the petitioner by the Website to get the document executed for registration on 15.04.2025. On

15.04.2025, the said document was registered at around 02.04.44 p.m., and subsequently, the Sub-Registrar has attested his signature on the Document on the same day and the Registered Document was scanned and uploaded on the Website. Subsequently, the - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:3351 WP No. 12246 of 2025 HC-KAR Registered Sale Deed was handed over to the petitioner on 15.04.2025.

3. I state that the Sub-Registrar could not attest his digital signature on the scanned Registered Sale Deed which was uploaded on the Website as there was a technical glitch on the Website on 15.04.2025. Accordingly, the digital signature on the uploaded scanned Registered Sale Deed dated 15.04.2025 was done by the Sub-Registrar on 16.04.2025 at

16.:09:28 p.m. "

3. Sri D.R.Ravishankar, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, while pointing out the discrepancy in the affidavit in referring to the petitioner as a party to the document and to whom the document is handed over, submits that the sale is presented on a holiday and that could not have been accepted by the second respondent and therefore the entire conveyance is impermissible. This assertion is contested by Sri.H.S.Dwarakanath, the learned counsel for the third and fourth respondents, as also by Sri S.N.Ashwathanarayan, the learned - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:3351 WP No. 12246 of 2025 HC-KAR Senior Counsel for the seventh respondent, who is the beneficiary of the conveyance under the Sale Deed.

4. This Court must observe that there is some error in describing the seventh respondent when seen in conjunction with the description in the Sale Deed. There are arbitral proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the petitioner with another asserting interest in the subject property. It is inarguable that the efficacy of the Sale Deed as against the petitioner's interest in the property will have to be adjudicated on a comprehensive consideration of all circumstances.

5. This Court is of the considered view that even the petitioner's grievance with the presentation and registration of the Sale Deed must be part of such comprehensive consideration in a newly instituted proceedings and the private respondents must be entitled to rely upon the affidavit filed by the - 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:3351 WP No. 12246 of 2025 HC-KAR second respondent as stated above. This Court is also of the considered view that the petitioner must be at liberty to demonstrate that the contents of the affidavit are materially incorrect and seek appropriate action against the concerned if he can in such proceedings demonstrate that a false affidavit has been filed. Therefore, this Court concludes that the questions presented be decided in these petitions. As such, the petition stands disposed of with liberty and observation as aforesaid. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr