- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10385 WP No. 30296 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 30296 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: S.A WAMIQ BEIG S/O LATE B.S AMIR BEIG AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/A 3RD CROSS CLERKPET SHIVAMOGGA-577202 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SURESH S. LOKRE, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI SHRAVAN S. LOKRE, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI SYED KHALANDAR S/O LATE SYED KARIM MAJOR IN AGE R/O TIPPUNAGAR K.K. COMPLEX FRONT ROAD THUNGA CHANNEL LEFT BEHIND JANATHA QUARTERS SHIVAMOGGA-577205 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SAATHVIK G., ADVOCATE FOR SRI KASHINATH J.D., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNEXURE-A BEING THE ORDER Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10385 WP No. 30296 of 2024 DATED 16.07.2024 UNDER I.A. NO. (6) IN O.S. NO. 62/2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIVAMOGGA, ALLOWING THE ABOVE PRAYER AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “i. Allow the above Writ Petition; ii. Grant a Writ of Certiorari to Quash the impugned Order at Annexure-A being the Order dated 16.07.2024 under I.A. No.(6) in O.S. No. 62/2017 passed by the Learned Prl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Shivamogga, allowing the above prayer. iii. Award the Costs and grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, in the above case, in the interest of Justice and Equity.” 2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that under identical circumstances in relation to the adjacent portion of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10385 WP No. 30296 of 2024 the subject property in question in a writ petition filed by the petitioner, who is the plaintiff in the suit, this Court in W.P. No.1659/2023 (disposed of on 19.01.2024) passed the following Order: "This petition by the plaintiff in O.S.No.733/2016 is directed against the impugned order dated 07.12.2022 passed on I.A.No.7 by the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga, whereby the said application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC for appointment of a Court Commissioner was dismissed by the Trial Court. 2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. The material on record discloses that the petitioner- plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit for mandatory injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property. The said suit is being contested by the respondents-defendants. After commencement of evidence, the petitioner-plaintiff has filed an application seeking appointment of Court Commissioner to ascertain the location, survey number and boundaries of the suit schedule property and the same was dismissed by the Trial Court. Aggrieved by which, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10385 WP No. 30296 of 2024 4. A perusal of the material on record including the impugned order will indicate that the impugned order passed by the Trial Court rejecting I.A.No.7 for appointment of Court Commissioner is not only contrary to the material on record, which indicates that there is a dispute regarding identity, survey number, location, etc., as can be seen from the rival contentions, but the impugned order is also contrary to the well settled principles of law governing appointment of Court Commissioner and the recent judgment of this Court in the case of Shadaksharappa Vs. Kumari Vijayalaxmi & others – 2023(3) KLJ 543. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the Trial Court rejecting I.A.No.7 has occasioned failure of justice warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. 5. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 07.12.2022 passed on I.A.No.7 in O.S.No.733/2016 by the trial court is hereby set aside and consequently, I.A.No.7 is allowed. (iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the parties to file their respective Memo of Instructions before the Court Commissioner. (iv) The Trial Court is directed to appoint a Court Commissioner and secure report and proceed further in accordance with law. (v) Liberty is also reserved in favour of the parties to file their objections to the Court - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10385 WP No. 30296 of 2024 Commissioner’s Report and examine/cross- examine him, if they so desire. (vi) All rival contentions between the parties are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.” 4. In view of the aforesaid order passed in favour of the very same writ petitioner, under identical / similar circumstances, I deem it just and appropriate to apply / invoke the doctrine of parity and allow the present petition also. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i). Petition is hereby allowed. (ii). The impugned order dated 16.07.2024 passed on I.A. No.VI in O.S. No.62/2017 by the Trial Court is hereby set aside and consequently, I.A. No.VI is allowed. (iii). Liberty is reserved in favour of the parties to file their respective Memo of Instructions before the Court Commissioner. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10385 WP No. 30296 of 2024 (iv). The Trial Court is directed to appoint a Court Commissioner and secure report and proceed further in accordance with law. (v). Liberty is also reserved in favour of the parties to file their objections to the Court Commissioner’s Report and examine/cross-examine him, if they so desire. (vi). All rival contentions between the parties are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SMA/List No.: 2 Sl No.: 0