- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4288 WP No. 19486 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 19486 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: Y.R. RIYAZ PASHA SON OF LATE KHADAR SAB AGED 75 YEARS AGRICULTURIST AND MERCHANT, R/O GOWNIPALLI VILLAGE, RAYALAPAD HOBLI, SRINIVASAPUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.B. CHANDRACHOODA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. M.S. RAMAMHON SON OF SRIRAMALU AGED 69 YEARS 2. SMT. VANAJAMMA W/O LATE VIJAYKUMAR AGED 54 YEARS 3. SRI. BHARATH S/O LATE VIJAYKUMAR AGED 31 YEARS 4. SRI. HARISH Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4288 WP No. 19486 of 2024 S/O LATE VIJAYKUMAR AGED 29 YEARS 5. SMT. HASEENA BEGAUM W/O LATE TAILOR BASHA AGED 63 YEARS 6. AYESHA S/O LATE TAILOR BASHA AGED 44 YEARS 7. SRI. BABJAN S/O LATE TAILOR BASHA AGED 42 YEARS 8. HARSHIYA D/O LATE TAILOR BASHA AGED 39 YEARS 9. MUBARAKA PASHA S/O LATE TAILOR BASHA AGED 39 YEARS 10. SRI. Y.N. ANSAR KHAN S/O LATE MAHABOOB KHAN AGED 56 YEARS 11. SRI. RAMAPPA S/O CHIKKA NARAYANAPPA AGED 68 YEARS 12. SRI. M.S. NAGARAJ S/O SRI SRIRAMULU AGED MAJOR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4288 WP No. 19486 of 2024 ALL ARE RESIDING AT GOWNIPALLI VILLAGE, SRINIVASPUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 161. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA R.S, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. G.H. SRINIVASAMURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R11) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 29.06.2024 PASSED IN R.A.NO. 103/2015 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KOLAR (ITINERATING AT SRINIVASAPUR) VIDE ANNX-P AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition by the appellant in R.A. No.103/2015 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kolar, itinerary at Srinivaspura, is directed against the impugned order dated 29.06.2024, whereby the first appellate Court rejected the report and evidence of the Court Commissioner appointed for the purpose of conducting local inspection of the suit schedule property. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4288 WP No. 19486 of 2024 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent - plaintiff instituted a suit in O.S. No.150/1994 against the petitioner - defendant for declaration, permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property. The said suit having been contested by the petitioner - defendant, the trial Court proceeded to pass a judgment and decree dismissing the suit filed by the petitioner - plaintiff. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree of the trial Court, the petitioner - plaintiff has preferred an appeal in R.A. No.103/2015 which is pending before the first appellate Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner- plaintiff filed an application under Order No. XXVI Rule 9 CPC seeking appointment of a Court Commissioner who conducted local inspection and submitted his report to which the respondent filed objections and the Commissioner was examined, pursuant to which the first appellate Court proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4288 WP No. 19486 of 2024 Commissioner's report, aggrieved by which the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent jointly submit that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, fresh Commissioner may be appointed to submit a fresh/new report which may be directed to be considered by the first appellate Court in accordance with law. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and joint submissions made by both sides, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition by issuing certain directions for appointment of a fresh Commissioner to conduct local inspection and issue further directions in this regard. Accordingly the following: ORDER (i) The petition is thereby disposed of. (ii) The first appellate Court in R.A. No.103/2015 is directed to appoint a fresh/new Commissioner to conduct local inspection of the suit schedule property and submit a report in this regard to the first appellate Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4288 WP No. 19486 of 2024 (iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of both parties to suggest the name of the Court Commissioner to be appointed by the first appellate Court. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner and respondent to submit memos of instructions before the Court Commissioner. (v) The Court Commissioner shall consider the memos of instructions submitted by both sides and submit a report to the first appellate Court in accordance with law. (vi) Liberty is reserved in favour of both parties to file their objections, if any, to the report of the Court Commissioner. (vii) Liberty is also reserved in favour of both parties to examine/cross-examine the Court Commissioner if they so desire after submission of the report. (viii) All rival contentions between the parties are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the merits/de-merits of the rival contentions on all aspects including the report of the Court Commissioner and his evidence. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4288 WP No. 19486 of 2024 (ix) The first appellate Court is directed to appoint a Court Commissioner and proceed further in the matter as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE YKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7