HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33203 WP No. 10036 of 2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 10036 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. SANJEEVAMMA D/O LATE RAMAIAH, W/O K.RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT SONNAPANAHATTI VILLAGE, MASTHI HOBLI, MALUR TAUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 139. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.SHASHI KUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. GOVINDAPPA S/O LATE RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT DODDAKALAHALLI VILLAGE, MASTHI HOBLI, MALUR TAUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 139. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHIVANANDA REDDY.R.V., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN OS NO. 63/2017 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MALUR SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 11.02.2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MALUR IN OS NO. 63/2017 ANX-A DIRECTING THE HON’BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MALUR TO PERMIT THE PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER TO CUT AND REMOVE/SELL THE EUCALYPTUS TREES FOR RS. 9,20,000/- ON THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY ITEM NO.1 IN OS NO. 63/2017 Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33203 WP No. 10036 of 2025 2 PENDING BEFORE THE PASSED BY THE HON’BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MALUR. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL ORDER 1. The present petition seeks to challenge an order dated 11.02.2025, passed by the Senior Civil Judge at Malur, in O.S.No.63/2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order’). By the Impugned Order, I.A. No.12 filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the CPC), filed by the defendant (Respondent herein) has been allowed. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff before the learned Trial Court, submits that the petitioner has no objection to the cutting of the eucalyptus trees, however, the required valuation of the trees has not been provided, which was to be Rs.9,20,000/- and not Rs.7,10,000/- as has been held by the learned Trial Court on 29.08.2022. He however submits that the Court has permitted the HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33203 WP No. 10036 of 2025 3 respondent/defendant to cut the trees at a valuation of Rs.7,10,000/-. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent/defendant on the other hand submits that the respondent had filed an application seeking Police protection to cut the eucalyptus trees. He submits that the application did not contain any valuation of the eucalyptus trees that have to be cut. Thus, he contends that the Court has only directed that the Police protection be granted and, after sale, deposit the amount in the Court. He further submits that as no valuation of the eucalyptus trees to be cut has been made, the amounts for which the eucalyptus trees are sold will be deposited in the Court. Thus, he submits that the Impugned Order does not suffer from any infirmity. 4. An examination of the Impugned Order reflects that the order refers to two memos stating two distinct value of the trees, at Rs.7,10,000/- given by the defendants and Rs.9,20,000/- by the plaintiffs. The directions in the Impugned Order do not reflect any price that has been HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33203 WP No. 10036 of 2025 4 agreed by the parties. The only direction that has been passed by the learned Trial Court is that the Police protection be given for cutting the trees and the amounts be deposited before this Court. The relevant extract of the order is set out below: “ORDER IA No.12 filed by the defendant under Section 151 of CPC is hereby allowed. PSI Masthi Police Station, Masthi is directed to give protection for defendant for cutting and remove the eucalyptus trees from the suit item No.1. The defendant is directed to cut and remove the standing eucalyptus trees from the suit schedule item No.1 property and after its sale deposit the sold amount before this Court.” [Emphasis Supplied] 5. The application reflects that the I.A.12 has been filed to get Police protection to cut and remove the standing eucalyptus trees in the suit schedule property. It further states in the application and affidavit as follows: “APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 CPC THE FIRST DEFENDANT IN THE ABOVE CASE BEGS TO SUBMIT AS FOLLOWS: That for the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble be pleased to grant police help by directing Masthi Police to give HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33203 WP No. 10036 of 2025 5 protection to defendant in order to cut and remove standing eucalyptus trees in suit schedule item No.1 as per the order of this Hon’ble Court by allowing this application in the interest of justice and equity.” xxx xxx xxx AFFIDAVIT “I, Govindappa S/o. late Ramiah aged about 66 years, residing at Doddkallahalli Village, Masthi Hobli, Malur Tq., do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows: I declare that I am the defendant in the above case, I know the facts of this case, the plaintiffs filed the above suit for partition and separate possession of her alleged share in all the suit schedule properties. I submit that in some of the suit schedule lands I planted eucalyptus trees after the marriage of the plaintiff, invested huge amount for rearing the said trees and for protecting the said trees, I raised huge loans for development of suit schedule properties. I submit that this Hon'ble Court in the above case as per orders on I.A. No.1 and I.A. II dated 29.08.2022 permitted me to cut and remove standing trees in suit item No.1 Sy No.75 by restraining the plaintiff not to interfere with my said work and report to this Hon'ble court the amount realized from the said sale. In response, this Hon’ble court said order on 6-10-2024 and 7-10-2024 went to cut the trees in said land, the plaintiff with her supporters not allowed me to cut the said trees. On 07-10-2024 I lodged complaint to Masthi police in this regard, the said police gave NCR 339/2024 dated 7-10- 2024 advised me to secure police protection from this Hon'ble court, the plaintiff is not allowing our collies to enter into suit, item No.1 and threatening to take away my life and my collies life, unless police help as ought is granted the plaintiff will not allow me to implement this Hon'ble court order. If this Hon'ble court allows my application, as ought no hardship or injury will be cause to other side. Hence this affidavit.” [Emphasis Supplied] HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33203 WP No. 10036 of 2025 6 6. However, neither the application nor the affidavit sets out any amount at which the eucalyptus trees have been valued. Thus, the question of ascertaining value does not arise at all. 7. However, as pointed by the parties, that in terms of a previous order dated 29.08.2022 passed by the learned Trial Court, permission to cut and remove the standing Eucalyptus trees from the suit schedule property No.1 was granted by the learned Trial Court from that date. In addition, directions were passed to the plaintiff and the defendants to jointly give a valuation report of the eucalyptus trees standing in the suit schedule property No.1. The relevant extract of the order dated 29.08.2022 is set out below: “With respect to suit schedule property No.1, the defendant is permitted to cut and remove the standing eucalyptus trees, till disposal of suit. The plaintiff and defendant both are directed to give a report to the court jointly regarding value and worth of eucalyptus trees standing in the suit schedule property No.1, after the report is given, defendant is permitted to cut and remove the standing eucalyptus trees.” [Emphasis Supplied] HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33203 WP No. 10036 of 2025 7 8. It is, however, undisputed that this report has not been filed. 9. Given this scenario, this Court finds that there is no infirmity in the Impugned Order. However, the parties are at liberty to comply with the order dated 29.08.2022, to the extent that they are directed to give a joint valuation report regarding the eucalyptus trees in the suit schedule property No.1, prior to the eucalyptus trees are cut. 10. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, stand closed. Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE JJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13