JUDGMENT : This intra Court appeal is filed by the appellant – Sangha challenging the order dated 08.11.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 38954/2016 filed by respondents-3 to 19 herein. Said writ petition was filed challenging the order dated 22.07.1994 (Annexure-J in writ petition) passed by the Assistant Revenue Officer, Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike thereby transferring khata of the property in question in favour of Chowdeshwari Togajaveera Kshatriya Sangha. 2. It is relevant to state that said writ petition was filed nearly after 22 years assailing the khata entered in the name of appellant – Sangha. Respondents-3 to 19 claim that they were the true/absolute owners of the property in question and their names ought to have been entered in the khata. 3. Learned Single Judge, after referring to the factual matrix placed before him, has come to the conclusion that there was a civil suit pending in O.S. NO. 2766/2012 filed by some of the writ petitioners against the said Sangha, wherein question of title and identity of the land etc., was involved and therefore same was required to be decided on the basis of relevant evidence to be adduced by both the sides. Having said so, learned Single Judge has issued a direction to both parties to appear before the Joint Commissioner, BBMP, Bengaluru on 12.12.2017 and the Joint Commissioner has been directed to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to both parties and decide the question relating to entry of khata in favour of either of the parties considering the evidence led before him within a period of three months from the date of order so that, such entries can remain in force in the interregnum till the suit was decided. Learned Single Judge has further made it clear that said khata entries would be subject to the final decision of the trial Court. 4. Being aggrieved by the direction issued by the learned Single Judge directing the Joint Commissioner to undertake such an exercise to decide the question relating to entries to be effected in the khata pertaining to the property, this appeal has been preferred. 5. We have heard Sri Jayakumar S Patil, learned Senior counsel appearing for appellant and Sri D.R. Ravishankar, learned counsel appearing for contesting respondents. 6. 5. We have heard Sri Jayakumar S Patil, learned Senior counsel appearing for appellant and Sri D.R. Ravishankar, learned counsel appearing for contesting respondents. 6. It has to be stated at the outset that learned Senior counsel appearing for appellant has rightly contended that in terms of Section 114A of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 power conferred on the Commissioner to undertake an enquiry into the correctness or otherwise of the transfer of khata effected under Section 114 either suo motu or otherwise is subject to the condition that such a power has to be exercised within a period of three years from the date of recording of transfer of title for the purpose of reopening the case and passing an order in respect thereof. 5. In the facts of the instant case, there is no dispute that way back on 05.07.1994 name of the appellant – Sangha was recorded in the khata of the property and the same is continued as on today. In such circumstance, if order passed by the learned Single Judge directing the Joint Commissioner to undertake an enquiry by providing reasonable opportunity to both parties relating to the entry to be made in the khata of the property is given effect to, it would tantamount to clothing the Joint Commissioner with the jurisdiction which is not vested in him under law. Indeed, as per the provision contained in Section 114A of the Act , it is made explicit that Joint Commissioner has no such power or jurisdiction to examine the matter after a lapse of three years from the date of recording of khata in the name of any person even if the allegation in the petition pertained to misrepresentation, fraud etc.,. 6. Indeed, as a matter of fact, such a review petition had been filed by the writ petitioners before the Joint Commissioner challenging the khata effected in the name of appellant – Sangha vide order dated 05.07.1994 and instead of pursuing the review petition filed before the Commissioner, writ petitioners had approached this Court by filing writ petitions. In the wake of the above, we are of the clear view that direction issued to the Joint Commissioner, BBMP, Bengaluru to enquire into the matter regarding khata to be effected in the name of appellant or the writ petitioners is not tenable in law. In the wake of the above, we are of the clear view that direction issued to the Joint Commissioner, BBMP, Bengaluru to enquire into the matter regarding khata to be effected in the name of appellant or the writ petitioners is not tenable in law. Moreover, the writ petitioners have approached the Civil Court in O.S.No.2766/2012. It is open for them to seek redressal in accordance with law in the pending suit. Direction issued by the learned Single Judge to the above effect is set aside. No opinion is expressed with regard to merits of the claim made by either of the parties. Rest of the order passed by the learned Single Judge is left undisturbed. Writ appeal is accordingly disposed of. In view of disposal of writ appeal, Interlocutory application – I.A.I/2017 for stay does not survive for consideration and accordingly it is dismissed.