- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1148 WP No. 100385 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 100385 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. SOBANI RAJKUMAR, S/O. LATE DEVENDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, HINDU, AGRICULTURIST, R/O BANNIKALLUVILLAGE, H.B. HALLI TALUKA, BALLARI DIST-583214. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SATHISH M.S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SOBANI NANJUNDAPPA S/O. LATE SIDDALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, HINDU, AGRICULTURIST R/O BANNIKALLU VILLAGE, H.B.HALLI TALUKA, BALLARI DIST-583214 2. SRI. B.S. PANDITAPPA S/O. LATE RAMAJJA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, HINDU, CULTIVATOR, R/O. BANNIKALLU VILLAGE, H.B. HALLI TALUKA, BALLARI DIST-583214. 3. SMT. PADMA W/O. MOOGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, HINDU, CULTIVATOR, R/O HYALYA POST, KOTTUR TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT-583134. 4. SMT. HANUMANTAVVA @ ANITHA, W/O. UMESHA @ BASAVARAJA, GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Date: 2025.01.24 16:36:47 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1148 WP No. 100385 of 2025 AGED 37 YEARS, R/O. HEBBAGODI, BENGALURU-560099. 5. SRI RAMAJJA 5/O PANDITAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, HINDU, CULTIVATOR, R/O BANNIKALVILLAGE, H.B. HALLI TALUK, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT-583214 6. SMT. RAJESHWARI W/O. NAGAPPA, AGED 30 YEARS, AGASANA KATTI, KURUBAGERI POST, HARAPANAHALLI, BALLARI DISTRICT-583131. 7. SUNITHA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, WHERE ABOUTS NOT KNOWN. 8. SMT. SOBANI SHRIDEVI W/O. LATE B.S. KOTREPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, HINDU, AGRICULTURIST, R/O. BANNIKALLU VILLAGE, H.B. HALLI TALUKA, VIJAYANAGAR DIST-583214. 9. SRI. SOBANI HANUMAGOUDA S/O LATE B.S. KOTREPPA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O BANNIKALLU VILLAGE, H.B. HALLI TALUKA, VIJAYANAGAR DIST-583214. 10. KUM. SOBANI SAGARA S/O LATE B.S. KOTREPPA AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O BANNIKALLU VILLAGE, H.B.HALLI TALUKA, VIJAYANAGAR DIST-583214. 11. KUM. SOBANI SAKSHI D/O LATE B.S.KOTREPPA AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. BANNIKALLU VILLAGE, H.B.HALLI TALUKA, VIJAYANAGAR DIST-583214. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS DISPENSED WITH) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1148 WP No. 100385 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE AN ORDER OR DIRECTION OR NECESSARY WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06-01-2025 PASSED ON I.A. NO.10 AND I.A. NO.13 IN O S NO.14/2019 BY HON’BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI VIDE ANNEXURE-L IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Notice to respondents dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following relief: a) Issue an order or direction or necessary writ of Certiorari by quashing the impugned order dated 06-01-2025 passed on I.A. No.10 and I.A. No.13 in O.S. No.14/2019 by Hon’ble Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hagaribommanahalli vide ANNEXURE-L in the interest of justice and equity. b) To grant such other relief/relief’s as this Hon’ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of this case in the interest of justice. 3. A suit in O.S.No.294 of 2014 had been filed before the Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Hospet, which came to renumbered as O.S.No.14 of 2019 seeking for - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1148 WP No. 100385 of 2025 specific performance of Agreement of Sale dated 18.06.2013 stated to be executed by respondent No.1 herein in favour of the petitioner. 4. After trial an application under order XXVI Rule 9 of code of Civil Procedure was filed by the petitioner/plaintiff seeking for appointment of Court commissioner to visit the suit land and survey the entire suit land and fix the boundaries of plaintiff and defendants land and conduct punchanama and give a detailed report with sketch. Another application i.e, I.A.No.13 came to be filed under section 26 of the Specific Relief Act to amend the suit document Ex.P.1 as regards the schedule is concerned in respect of the description of the property. Both applications having been opposed, the trial Court vide impugned order dated 06.01.2025, dismissed the applications. It is challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1148 WP No. 100385 of 2025 5. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is a discrepancy in Ex.P.1 marked in the said suit as regards schedule of the property which is agreed to be sold and it is for that reason a commissioner is required to be appointed to determine the land in possession of the defendants and that agreed to be sold in favour of the plaintiff and on that basis permit rectification of the Agreement of Sale. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I am the considered opinion that the suit document being the Agreement of Sale, which is a bilateral contract between the parties, cannot be sought to be amended and rectified on the basis of application filed on the basis of the commissioner report to be submitted. in furtherance of the application filed by the plaintiff. 7. The plaintiff will be bound by the contents of the agreement and the details of the property mentioned - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1148 WP No. 100385 of 2025 in the said agreement and unilaterally cannot be sought to be changed by the plaintiff i.e., the very purpose for appointment of commissioner being to ascertain the land allegedly agreed to be sold and thereafter rectify the Agreement of Sale not being permissible. I do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by the trial Court. Hence, petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE CKK CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20