- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30633 W.P. No.2921/2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.2921/2020 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. MALLEDEVIRAPPA S/O LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/O. KYATHANABEEDU LAKYA HOBLI CHIKMAGALUR TALUK AND DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY DR. PRAJWAL K. ARADHYA, ADV., FOR SRI. S. KALYAN BASAVARAJ, ADV.,) AND: 1. SRI. SADASHIVA S/O SHANKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS. 2. SRI. GIRISH S/O VEERABHADREGOWDA @ BAKKEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS AGRICULTURIST. BOTH ARE R/AT KYATHANABEEDU LAKYA HOBLI CHIKMAGALUR TALUK. 3. THE P.D.O. PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER LAKYA GRAMA PANCHAYATH Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30633 W.P. No.2921/2020 LAKYA VILLAGE AND POST CHIKMAGALUR TALUK. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. AISWARYA, ADV., FOR SRI. YADUNANDAN N, ADV., FOR R3 R1 & R2 ARE SD AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD.24.1.2020 PASSED BY THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AT CHIKMAGALURU REJECTING THE APPLICATION NO.20 FILED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING APPOINTMENT OF A COURT COMMISSIONER UNDER ORDER XXVI RULE 9 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN O.S.NO.214/2012 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 24.01.2020 passed on IA.No.20 in OS.No.214/2012 by III Additional Civil Judge, Chikmagalur (for short 'the trial Court'). 2. Sri.Prajwal K. Aradhya, learned counsel for Sri.S.Kalyan Basavaraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this writ petition is filed challenging - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30633 W.P. No.2921/2020 the order passed by the trial Court rejecting the plaintiff's application seeking appointment of a Court Commissioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has also filed another suit in OS.No.511/2012 against respondent No.3 herein and another, wherein a relief is sought for declaration. Both suits are pending before the same Court. In O.S.No.511/2012, a Court Commissioner was appointed, and the Commissioner has submitted the report. It is further submitted that if the petitioner is permitted to produce and mark the said Commissioner's report in the present suit, namely O.S.No.214/2012, he would not press this writ petition. 3. In reply, the learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that she has no objection to produce and mark the report in O.S.No.214/2012. Her submission is placed on record. 4. In view of the above submissions, the writ petition is disposed of, without interfering with the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30633 W.P. No.2921/2020 impugned order passed by the trial Court, by permitting the petitioner to produce and mark the certified copy of the Commissioner's report submitted in OS.No.511/2012 in OS.No.214/2012. 5. It is needless to observe that the respondents have every right to cross-examine the witness on such issue. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17