- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6388 WP No. 105674 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 105674 OF 2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: KUMARI LEKHA D/O NANDAKUMAR NAIDU, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O C/O NANDAKUMAR DAMODAR NAIDU, ”MANJUNATH NILAY” SAINAGAR, UNKAL, HUBBALLI, DISTRICT: DHARWAD. PIN CODE-580 031, THROUGH HER GPA HOLDER SHRI. NANDAKUMAR S/O DAMODAR NAIDU, AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O “MANJUNATH NILAY”, SAINAGAR, UNKAL, HUBBALLI, DISTRICT: DHARWAD, PIN CODE-580 031. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANJAY.S.KATAGERI., ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. MANGALA W/O KALLANAGOUDA KABBUR, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O NO.31/12A, PARASWADI, 2ND STAGE, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI, REPRESENTED BY HER P.A.HOLDER, SHRI. KALLANGOUDA S/O SHANKARGOUDA KABBUR, PIN CODE-580 023. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. IRANAGOUDA.K.KABBUR., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6388 WP No. 105674 of 2023 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Sanjay S.Katageri., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Iranagouda K.Kabbur., counsel for the respondent have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated:24.08.2023 passed by the I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi on I.A.No.XVI in O.S.No.154/2013 vide Annexure-P and consequently dismissing the said application filed under Order 26 Rule 9 and 10 of CPC vide Annexure-M. 3. For convenience's sake, the parties shall be referred to based on their status and ranking before the Trial Court. 4. The short facts are these: The plaintiff filed a suit on the file of I Addl. Civil Judge, Hubli, in O.S.No.154/2013. After service of summons, the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6388 WP No. 105674 of 2023 defendant appeared through her counsel and filed a written statement. The parties led evidence and the documents were also marked and the case was set down for arguments at that juncture, the plaintiff filed an application for appointment of a Court Commissioner. The same was objected by the defendant. The Trial Court vide order dated:24.08.2023 allowed the application and appointed the Surveyor of Ward No.24/A, Unkal, Hubballi as the Court Commissioner and issued the instructions to the Court Commissioner. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court. 5. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Counsel Sri.Sanjay S.Katageri., in presenting his arguments vehemently contends that the plaintiff moved an application for appointment of Commissioner at belated stage. He argued by saying that the Trial Court has erroneously allowed the application. Counsel, therefore, submits that an appropriate order may be passed. Counsel Sri.Iranagouda K.Kabbur., justified the order of the Trial Court. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6388 WP No. 105674 of 2023 Counsel for the respondent has placed reliance on the following decision: SRI.SHADAKSHARAPPA V/S. KUMARI VIJAYALAXMI AND OTHERS IN W.P.NO.201274/2022 DISPOSED OF ON 24.01.2023. 6. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 7. Suffice it to note that the plaintiff requested the Court for appointment of Court Commissioner to measure the property i.e., plot Nos.4 and 7 and to submit the report. The impugned order is furnished along with the Writ Petition and the same is marked as Annexure-P. I have perused the same minutely. Except quoting the decisions, the Trial Court has not assigned any reasons. Simply quoting decisions is insufficient; a judgment/ order demands a reasoned conclusion. Needless to say, mere citation of precedents, without reasoned analyses does not constitute an order. An order must go beyond mere citation; it requires reasoned application of law. A judgment/ order requires more than just quoting decisions; it necessitates a reasoned analyses of the facts and applicable law. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6388 WP No. 105674 of 2023 In my view, the matter requires a remand. The Trial Court is directed to reconsider the application and pass order on the merits of the case. 8. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated:24.08.2023 passed by the I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi on I.A.No.XVI in O.S.No.154/2013 vide Annexure-P is quashed. Since the matter is already set down for the arguments, a gentle reminder is issued to the Trial court to reconsider the application and pass the order on the merits of the case as expeditiously as possible. 9. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed and remanded. Because of disposal of the Writ Petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of and the interim order, if any, granted by this Court stands discharged. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 57