- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24224 W.P. No.22982/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.22982/2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. G. DODDANNA S/O LATE ERAPPA (SINCE DEAD AND REP. BY HIS LR'S) SRI. NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE G. DODDANNA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS RESIDENT OF KANDENAHALLI HIRIYURU TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 577546. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KASHINATH J.D. ADV.,) AND: 1. SMT. LAKKAMMA W/O KRISHNAPPA D/O LATE SANNAVEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.16, 4TH CROSS MOHANKUMAR NAGAR YESHWANTHAPURA BANGALORE 560022. 2. SMT. J.K. VARALAKSHMI W/O K.M. VENKATESH D/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24224 W.P. No.22982/2022 RESIDING AT NO.16, 1ST A MAIN 4TH CROSS, MOHANKUMAR NAGAR YESHWANTHAPURA, BANGALORE 560022. 3. SRI. HANUMANTHARAYAPPA S/O LATE SANNAVERAPPA AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS RESIDING AT JANGAMARANAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST NIDAGAL HOBLI PAVAGADA TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 572116. 4. SRI. S. SHIVARAMAIAH S/O LATE SANNAVEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS WORKING AS LECTURER VANI VILAS COLLEGE HIRIYUR TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 572143. 5. SRI. THIPPERUDRAIAH S/O G. DODDANNA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT KANDENAHALLI HIRIYUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 577546. 6. SRI. RAMACHANDRA @ RAMAREDDY AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS RESIDING AT V.H. PALYA NIDAGAL HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 572116. 7. SMT. NAGAMMA W/O LATE HANUMANTHARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT UADDAGATTE NIDAGAL HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 572116. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24224 W.P. No.22982/2022 8. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O ESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.3, IEDP LAYOUT 11TH CROSS, HALALKERE ROAD T B CIRCLE CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 577501. 9. SMT. SANNEERAMMA W/O LATE SANEERAPPA (SINCE DEAD PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS 1, 2, 5, 6 AND 7 ARE THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED AND THEY ARE ALREADY ON RECORD). 10. SMT. THIMMAKKA W/O RANGASHAMYA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.3246, 8TH CROSS 2ND MAIN ROAD, S S PURAM TUMKUR 572102. 11. SMT. VEERAHANUMAKKA W/O ERANNA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS RESIDING AT C/O JAYAMMA VATARA BUILDING MUTTUR WARD NO.3, 6TH DIVISION DODDABALLAPURA TOWN BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 561203. 12. SMT. SIDDAGANGAMMA @ INDIRA W/O SHIVASHANKAR D/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.38, 5TH CROSS JAIMARUTHINAGAR, NANDINI LAYOUT BANGALORE 560096. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24224 W.P. No.22982/2022 13. SRI. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE SANNAVEERAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY LR'S PLAINTIFF AND 7TH DEFENDANT WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD). …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH H.V. ADV., FOR R1 & R2 V/O/DTD:25.11.2022, R-3 TO R-13 IS D/W) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 07.11.2022 PASSED ON MEMO DTD 05.08.2022 FILED BY PETITIONER FILED IN FDP NO.2/2017 ON THE FILE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT PAVAGADA AS PER ANNEXURE-A CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE MEMO OR DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT TO EXTEND OPPORTUNITY TO PETITIONER HEREIN TO CROSS EXAMINE THE COURT COMMISSIONER TO MEET THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24224 W.P. No.22982/2022 ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 07.11.2022 passed on a memo dated 05.08.2022 filed by the petitioner in FDP No.2/2017 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Pavagada (for short, 'the trial Court'). 2. Heard Sri.Kashinath J.D., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Harish H.V., learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 3. The petitioner herein, who was the defendant No.3(a) in O.S.No.7/1997, has filed a memo as well as an application in FDP No.2/2017 seeking to discard the Commissioner's Report. The said memo as well as the application was opposed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2. The trial Court under the impugned order rejected the memo as well as the application. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed a suit in O.S.No.7/1997 for the relief of partition and separate possession. The said suit was dismissed. Being aggrieved, respondent Nos.1 and 2 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24224 W.P. No.22982/2022 (plaintiffs in O.S.No.7/1997) have filed regular first appeal in R.A.No.74/2012, which came to be allowed vide judgement dated 26.07.2014 by holding that the plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 and defendant No.7 are jointly entitled to get 1/6th share and defendant Nos.1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 are also entitled to get 1/6th share each. The plaintiffs in the suit have initiated the final decree proceedings, which is registered as FDP No.2/2017. In the said case, the trial Court appointed the Commissioner. The said Commissioner issued notice to the parties as is evident from Annexure-E2. The contention of the petitioner is that the Court Commissioner sent a notice to the incorrect address of the petitioner. Hence, the said notice was never served. Thus, the report of the Commissioner placed in the FDP proceedings is required to be rejected. 4. It is to be noticed that the respondent No.3/defendant No.1 has filed RSA No.1621/2014 and in the said appeal initially there was an interim order and this - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24224 W.P. No.22982/2022 Court later vacated the said interim order by clarifying that the FDP proceedings shall go on. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 has contented that no share is allotted in favour of the petitioner herein. Hence, in the FDP proceedings the petitioner herein cannot have any share and the share allotted to his vendor could be allotted to him. Be that as it may, what is required to be noticed here is that the petitioner, who is a party in the FDP proceedings, should have an opportunity to object the Commissioner's report, if the said report is against his interest. Considering the said aspect, without interfering with the impugned order, I am of the view that ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is permitted to file an objection to the Commissioner's report. 6. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24224 W.P. No.22982/2022 ORDER i. Writ Petition is disposed of. ii. The impugned order dated 07.11.2022 passed in FDP No.2/2017 is not interfered with. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file objections to the Commissioner's report. The trial Court shall regulate its proceedings after considering the objections of the petitioner. iii. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, pending I.As., if any, would not survive for consideration. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8