- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39854 WP No. 27753 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 27753 OF 2025 (GM-WAKF) BETWEEN: AHL-E-SUNNATH UL-JAMATH JAMIL MASJID (WAKF) REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, BASHEER AHMED S/O LATE MOHAMMAED HANIEF, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, HINDIGANALA VILLAGE, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562122 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. A.LOURDU MARIYAPPA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKF REPRESENTED BY ITS CEO, NO-6 CUNNIGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU-560052 2. SYED ABDUALLA S/O.LATE. SYED JAFFER AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 3. SUHAIL S/O SYED ABDUALL, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 4. SARDAR S/O LATE.KASIM SABHI AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS. 5. KADHAR S/O SARDAR AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39854 WP No. 27753 of 2025 6. RIYAZ PASHA S/O MEHABOOB PASHA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, 7. FAYAZ PASHA, S/O LATE. MAHABOOB PASHA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS. 8. IMTIAYAZ PASHA S/O DASTIGIR AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. RESPONDENTS 2 TO 8 ARE R/ AT HINDIGANALA VILLAGE, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562122 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NAVEEN J., ADVOCATE FOR R2, R3 TO R8) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S.NO-13-2025, ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE KARNATAKA WAKF TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU DIVISION, BENGALURU AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; a. Call for the records in O.S.No.13/2025, on the file of the Hon’ble Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Bengaluru Division, Bengaluru, b. Consequently, set aside the impugned order dated 29.08.2025 passed in O.S.No.13-2025, on I.A.No.5 at - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39854 WP No. 27753 of 2025 Annexure-G on the file of the Hon’ble Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Bengaluru Division, Bengaluru. c. Pass such other order or directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of costs, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioner had filed a suit in O.S.No.13 of 2025 seeking a declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the Suit Scheduled Property, which is a burial ground, and a consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff. In the said suit, an application under Order 39 of Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, having been filed an order of injunction, was granted. 3. Thereafter, the defendants filed his application in IA No.5 under Rule 9 of Order 26 of the Code of Civil Procedure for appointment of a commissioner to measure and fix the boundaries of the plaint schedule properties and the suit scheduled properties and draw a sketch of the entire topography showing the situation of properties of the plaintiff and defendants, the said - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39854 WP No. 27753 of 2025 application having been allowed vide order dated 29.08.2025. It is in that background that the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 4. Sri. A.Lourdu Mariyappa., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that Issues are yet to be framed and before issues being framed a commissioner cannot be appointed, the appointment of Commissioner and discharge of the commissioner warrant would amount to collection of evidence and as such before evidence is led by the parties, a commissioner cannot be appointed. 5. I am unable to accept the said submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner in light of the judgement of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Shadaksharappa S/o Veranna vs. Kumari Vijayalaxmi And Ors in WP 201274/2022 dated 24.01.2023 wherein this Court has categorically held that appointment of Commissioner in matters relating to boundary disputes and/or the like would have to be - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39854 WP No. 27753 of 2025 done at the earliest, so as to save the precious time of the Court. 6. In the present matter there is apparently a dispute as regards the boundaries in as much as the plaintiff has given one boundary in the plaint and the defendant has given another boundary in the written statement, claiming the written statement schedule property belongs to the defendant. For the purpose was attainment of the same, the WAKF Tribunal in my considered opinion has rightly appointed Commissioner which cannot be found fault with. 7. However, the WAKF Tribunal has not provided an opportunity to the petitioner to furnish a memo of instructions in the discharge of the Commissioner warrant. 8. In that view of the matter, both the petitioner who is the plaintiff and respondents No.2 to 8 who are the defendants therein are permitted to submit their respective memo of instructions to the Commissioner- - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39854 WP No. 27753 of 2025 Taluk Surveyor, which shall be so furnished to said Taluk Surveyor before the end of day 10.10.2025. 9. In the event that the memo of instructions is not furnished by the end of the day 10.10.2025, the taluk Surveyor shall go on and execute the Commissioner Warrant in terms of the order passed by the WAKF Tribunal. 10. With the above observations, the petition stands dismissed. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12