- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2891 WP No. 33386 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 33386 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI NAGENDRA S/O LATE VEERABADRE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS R/AT BEMMATHI VILLAGE ALANAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI PIRIYAPATNA TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT-571107. 2. SRI.MAHADEVA S/O LATE VEERABADRE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT BEMMATHI VILLAGE ALANAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI PIRIYAPATNA TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT-571107 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MURALI M.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI P R SRINVIASA RAO S/O LATE H.K.RAMARAO AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS R/AT NEAR GURUKRUPA HOUSE HOLAKOTE, PIRIYAPATNA TOWN MYSORE DISTRICT-571107. Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2891 WP No. 33386 of 2024 2. SRI.KUMAR, S/O KUNTANAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT IYALAPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, PIRIYAPATNA TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT-571107 3. B S SWAMY S/O LATE SANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT BEMMATHI VILLAGE ALANAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI PIRIYAPATNA TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT-571107 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.V.S.NARAYANA., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) CALL FOR RECORDS IN O.S NO.135/2014, ON THE FILE OF LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT PIRIYAPATNA AND QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18-9-2024 PASSED IN OS NO.135/2014, ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PIRIYAPATNA, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION (IA NO.18) FILED UNDER ORDER 26 RULE 9 OF CPC AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs challenging the order dated 18.09.2024 passed by the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2891 WP No. 33386 of 2024 Civil Judge and JMFC, Periyapatna, on I.A.No.18 filed under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC in O.S.No.135/2014, whereby the Trial Court has rejected the said application. 2. The plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration claiming title by way of adverse possession. On service of suit summons, the defendants have appeared and filed written statement. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiffs have filed I.A.No.18 under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC seeking for appointment of Competent Surveyor as the Court Commissioner to make local inspection and measure the house and barrel situated at the suit schedule properties and measure the cultivated land of the plaintiffs. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the writ papers. 4. The suit is filed for the relief of declaration of title by way of adverse possession. If the Commissioner is appointed for the purpose of exact identification and - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2891 WP No. 33386 of 2024 possession of the suit property, it amounts to collection of evidence. Hence, the Commissioner cannot be appointed for spot inspection and to measure the house, barrel and the land cultivated by the plaintiffs. The burden lies on the plaintiffs to prove their possession over the suit schedule property by adducing oral and documentary evidence. 5. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the Trial Court has adopted right approach to the real state of affairs and there is no error or illegality committed by the Trial Court while passing the impugned order. No good grounds are made out to exercise the supervisory jurisdiction vested under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. There is no merit in the writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE DM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8