High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri K Abdul Khader S/O Late Ibrahim … vs Smt Aysamma T Alias Aysha Khalid on 10 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri K Abdul Khader S/O Late Ibrahim … vs Smt Aysamma T Alias Aysha Khalid on 10 March, 2008
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
n: man 51:33 cotmr or mam-rum. nnnennonm
mm: 11-113 '1'!-!!: 10*' pm: or mac:-1, zstjea

BEFORE

w.n.no sea or VA2O0:5i«Qn;a§¢5'  
3 EN ,% V '. _ 
T ; as; 1: ABDUL :umnnri"%% 

3/o mu: xaaattztn nsmur
mm 5-'. 9-....w   L     %

msxnm K s rnwndr; 
mnusmgpm-515 $24»   i %

 M:3.-_M3"s:i--- : .fi-.31-I.f§E|.:..r!!.l L1 -A49!)

1 ksggr  Q-lag mrstm 1:1-nmxn
wiokmmxn 544.3.
 man % 34 -mags

  RE:sIDINE}"'N£' mm rmnm I-ms:

  It 5 Human 
~ %A_LA«}&«k%Amxm9mr
« myteaazonn-24

 n 2  3'11: 1-mazsn -1'

"Q35 '1'Ii('.3'ki'i|ii.iI'1'-I.'l'J RD'? T is

JIGBD 3'1 YEFLR5

RESIDING AT  NEH IIOUBE
fl".!.'.'.:.%!.7.'..l.D'..|! '."I15..-.T.!t!§.3. £19 £951'
DHIHGILOIII TALUK

3': K

. . . BESEONDEFTS

(By 81:1 8 O S1'IIV.I.RPM BHPFNIV. i



nus we 18 nun Imnnn antenna 226 mm "22? or
firs <:m"s-'£1-'1*u"rIu":s' er mwza 'um:-'H A ms; @113 TO
cunst-I ma camp. n'r.21.:L1.2oo5 «k%«.91x;as213%'A(oH
::A.no.4 mm 5 :m 03.512/'2oo5  k%~9iIz.fi«%oir

-1:1-1: coumr or cmn JUDGE tJIlA.%D1'~h)   
I-mnzwxm as arm-in Ann,  earn 

1-"..'."-3PI.aI"".....""1'IQ..'-IS .

'I.'h:l.s petition   't:~fi .£o&  
hearing in -B group 1:1';,'_l;nI 'day... 'is!-.a (gaunt made

the fell-.=u..:~..r:; 
:m% 5§et1u:.¢ng:L;: d.s.no. 612i200di
in thug  ;; .a£ ''   . D11. 1 ltangaloro,
  injuncztian in
ru; s;_:c«¢t' V'§£f -»j:§h§"'--i.§z§p§:tiou dnpcxibad in the

as -$1.'; 4..?"<.*-\_ Vrh' .'r21_a:i..z~._= 1';

 ~€E;hQLA'dIfon<i:a;:;t__.. In 1?: Ii iiiifs. fih" iriiiifiiaii-it

 .V1Vv.as.-.'.v"«_ :.!.':'r.«..3A:,'6z;!___ I.1L.IV to: appointment or a surveyor

  the office of the a.D.L.R as court:

 and to submit the upart with

  to the matter: stated in the

direct the defendants to maintain stain:-ciua

in respect: of the existing road. Apart fun

that he had tilnd 4 memo dated 4.10.2005 to
\

'-8.
/.'.



place on record certain things which had taken
place during the pendoncy of the suit.' The

defendants in this 1111: 1.0., the 

hI.a:_:g;L.r;- hug append the said 

c-annual appearing  innit':-11"'~-aiciIl.s'.+A.. .i':vz.-iaii'.

court by In common  datid;  hfia

rejected the  .i:ii~«..10.260!§,and alao

I.EuNo.I? i V. fl"i,B§ifly*a§fitiévod; this writ
V' V 1  as the

'13
II
II1'
IP-
ll'l'

X :9-
;E,
'A Er'? A
:3
:5'
13
IU
IE5

   for the petitioner

qzentariileti '-1.:'ha.f: fho trial court has acted

 .V'V"i"$:1iiqdtl'1y fiiikiivuith material izrcgulnxity in

I.-I

A

In
2
<3

Lagn_rz;n<i gating;

a+a th*t th' trial aauzt haa bee

 AA _ ciizfiiud away by anioxeier: passed in the ouiie:

V'  Etaga or proceedings, in Viifl or which. I.Aa

IV 6 V have bun rojentod. Learned counul

ceontandod that 11' I .A..No.IV was not



. 'I
~,.:.

liberty should have been renewed by the court:
to onablo ths plaintiff to file an ampliaaxion

at a later stage or thn suit. _as

I.A.No.V is concerned, lIu_:;:;'1':V:ia¥::I'?.A_.:'~

status quo of the fifiéajsertyg' fie?'-=  £51:

fin:-ajudi ca would: hp qifiqi-£1   .. 'tho ' {dd-findanta .

thfi %%%%    ihm: 1*:
cotirt; * is'  in passing the impugned

¢:c1§ra4{."Le:a::iia¢i"". counsel. pointed out that

 _   been dismissed and I.B.No.III

 'qJa~J.ouad.~  an order dated

a W zeea *.:"~-

I ..uI-3?."-_I

I
I
-

II
is
fun.

3

H
2!:

1}
2′

n T mhijitainuialo and thus thu trial couzi: was

‘V.,_ juati£iod in raj-mating the application. A: tax:

as prayer in I.a.No.IV in concuzcned. learned
counan-1 eontendud that it was premature.

Legged c_’.-m_1_n.:_IImI; p.,L;¢;-ad reliance on certain

\.,.

/’

decisions at this aourt to contend that, the
court Cotmianionur cannot be mpoint§§ “»p:io:

to the parties stunning avidamo

«i. In it-irm cf ‘fihi i’;1.)Ai6..’I. ,,é_.fi
perusal. or the: rocqrgl. point’. é’:c:Vi.’s9
for my canaiderntion _ V ‘ V ‘

“‘M1o!:he’:_ the court has
committed :idt’ex’.£..p”;i; arrays.’ anounting
ta _ jur1ad.1bt1azm_1 ‘*ag:r=ars and
1l1agI’1v.tty:_’ in” ‘;:l’a’.§m.i’aa£n:: “I. 41!. Na. IV 5

.=:. .1-.1. :-.r¢:;%’r.t:-‘F

«««« ” in….diuputa that, the suit

ia”<_ f x' ¢_i__c_:;I.u.I at pamanent

-r’-w–‘.’_..~-V,

ufitzizi.-..an,’ ._ “c-6° ‘fiaatzain the ..

fltiainaing through them from encroaching
‘ <a;c*v._v1§:.*§a-fisaaaing upon the prop-arty described to
" t:hev of the plaint. The suit has been

c::::itg..-.i*'I:od by tho dotandants. Issues ham been

–;’1I.n.l geuzt whgz; 1.21;; g_It_1$t:

up-um -ur’ up — _

filed Under Order 26 Rule 9 OPE: to nppcsint a
surveyor attached to the o:Efice_ of the
A.D.L.R. to conduct spot irfspoction and to

\

r an

submit the report. on _-.tha *pointaltuat:to:.~a
stated in the application. The:’:”‘~.i said
application having been opposed,

oxdozc has came 1:¢ be panned.

6. This court iif1;_afh.a ‘–:?:h:¢i§i
1931(3) 11:: flio dispute
rolntu up the ukeech filed

along itha the mod to:

..:::a: p$§;;ii:ie:’_’hmr-hiiiihfiducad cviriona-it in t’i
auiiz, The .V pé:h:§r*~..’:j¢ou£a:rod upan the court for

‘:”3399irifFfi§_!!?-V ‘of coumiaaionor to: local

ix..’}.j:rz&;ss:s:io:iVAiiiito enable the court for better:

at the evidence, which an on

, Z-I-Xnf _
~.4a.Iu.m~.’.I-ya ‘-2

‘iwm-.a, it is clean that, -.-:1-.e:~. t..e=e i.-.-

n T a”v::1iupute rewarding the identity 01′ accuracy

V’ the pxopoxty, mod for appointment at a

cmnniuionu: arisen, after than parties have

101: in their ovidonca.

\,.

/.

1′. In the can of lnttqpa lb. lag}:
zupozud J: In 1.!!!’ lannuh pant this
court in has held as £1J.oI-us: J

“3. I 1-Junk, The iowo;V11?¢a.urtf~ is”-« K
right and that camaia§iid2a.§z: ‘
ce:~..-‘:n: be a%.!2′:t;-a-v.j*.’ ta ‘ 32;.-4.?’ ~w.::,._£§h
to who is in paase_a”Ision’~. “ca! A ut’hg”‘~a=m3ta
local in vastly: £3911» to’ ~.1’m-hutigate
I.:_h.u.n #49:; _.;=_1:’ E-I_i:g;ia¢l_g VAv.;r_l’:it_=_l.1
are faund __ an fizhq .§x,dpprty and to
flake a ra;é**a.a.é_c-a’~i__£;fi} ffigr-522% ass that
llattar toH1:_haV.»::’p::i:t*;.V’1′::v._a suit tar
injurgc-‘z.ian:”chaa.:: quaatis-nV_ an to aha
ig sin”y;za3ng:eIg;;Ii’::;: “:a4E_;:;a_pgrty, is
.a.__. ts; .__ba._ decided by the Court
ca’ #336 za*;%a;§A.’iV’i$:*-‘c%.a5 évidasa, =i’t..’==:

…. ..p.:-iii .._d»pcs:_nani:a,:;k, to be adduced
h_’;;-‘~§;§:o True funatinn cannot
be .di:{agat;dd_ “to ‘a commissioner who
*ucannagfi..;EifldA__”‘~m;1t as to who in in
3:29..-$159.1 an ” . 91’ :.—.h.-.- ggegexzyi

Aa’¢m,.rdi:ag1-_y,”‘ the Jamar court was

“a:,ighi:’-vi;q____,¢rajaai:ing the appiiaatiari.-‘-‘

ii’ -*%.’.’a*.a.- “- “‘2′.”

X T :’i.i?*..iaa? noticing the fact that the

V’ ésmmiuaiomr had bun appointed batons the

partius have lot in their evidence and finding
the same to ho illegal it has bun held as

\,

feilzaees /
/ r a

‘1’ rind considerable -«force in

the t_r.w.1e;eie.=n -2: the –iee.2.-n.-;»r_!.
couneel fer the peti ti om:

defendant. an eiraninatien cf
ardex impugned discloses thn~t.; ‘the
Trial court misdirected itna¥i.–Ii’,A
the nxeniee tizet ;=ieintii?fe”~–VVJ;£(?ing

alleged ena:oac1men.ty»..the.’ en'”teint”‘ ef

1,’.

fifirnanfaant was 1»:-i;’,3fq;£gf::-tug: * _ new
noted down by a cennienianng’ ..tn ~_l1′:e_.
appointed. wauié aeeiet tilae

court in anuinghvte a e’nna1uei¢n”‘v«a!rér
the allegation ‘art’ anate.abE’anen;t by
t.’:e pleinti.f.fg….. _*en’:a!i e.@:.!..!:!_.’ not
other.-wiee ‘ .;:i1.ue1i 1In”te.l.d~~.. of hazdehip
at misery tee-tf3_e’;«. Aeiefnmient. it the
coat ‘oi’ .Al:(135a,t£ti:m;..V “it. must be
not.ic=ed.__ that “z’:~.’,1e_ 15m’_.ief:.in the wit
eeei tn»: fez? ” .,Ia.2:e.hi.l.Ii tety
i;1j2:undt.t’;7nn n”otj fer a mandatory
injngmtifin ._ jsasiinsinn fiir”ii”

encxeeelauent if any. If

maze _a1′.ras–_’a.eny_ aneroaehnent by the
antenna.-nt,. t’-epqzaintitte have other

,:emec¥i_ee..’= rather than eeek

—-.1-‘ A ” I 13
.,;;pwntnant’.,._-at a ca-art Ceauiseienez.

ma Adneixeeennant as alleged in not

the e’t2z:_1__g;ent latter for eansidoxation
in the auit for permanent
~ “~13; tsnctien . In the effidevi t

W-v’–*–3;-4-..v:_}ri::g the epgiieetieei it is

‘Jen-t’e1=the use oi’ the plaintiff: that
‘the petitioner had in fact
.. enernaehad upon certain portion at
V ” the plain tii’.E’s preperty. me
pieedinge dies; nee tlaet by the

Application, the petitioner ee-eke to
asfifiiififi ana tallest evieia-nae as ts
the area allegedly one:-aeahed upon
by the defendant. ‘H10 need to invoke
Dede: 26 Rule .9 ::2c._. ie not for

collecting evidence but to elucidate
rn-:9: ha gnthnrnd

.-I-I-Q—

93%|?

C 95–u In vacuum I’-

ei.the.r from the mate.-.’.\ie.I can record
\r

/9

or from the avidanaa adduced by the

war? in: – 5′
W ftffi

9. In the back ground at rigid
not maintuinahlo “ha_€9_::a iiii;

in their :espu<:1:ivcf*ifiido bfi éviéitiiicn and

application p%aanvV"ArV§joctod as

Premature. Katie; Passed oh

.wa:':a to com: to

thei" than is «I and for

gpgrqitifmfitfxtwoi fférmiaaionor to elucidate the

in oxdu: to enable the court

fa: 3.v:……e1..:~.ci..5r -1' 1.-szeatisre j1.._,=d-rm.-.ei~…; ii .1..I.I
af: lib».-urfzjr is: 'par: ardirs far: "gaaint-mi"t" af

AA Ctiuiiz ccrumiaaionor on its man or at than

H instance at the parties, 11' can is made out

to the satisfaction of the trial court. I-lance.

thn order passed by the trial court on

1" n ma. 1'1! an
J-nraarIvo.L'I' vilausvv uv

10

exercising the jurisdiction vested in it not

acting with material illegality.

consideration the dia§1i§4§al”‘– at
allowing of qxaxit
than relic: pnafia has hold
that withqnt: jiufitnct status of
M l 1 -mu n..g-1:.

” “—

Ll

mnintfiin«é’n}lp.’V” ‘I;i’*5f_f:’j;ci; iihe ‘trial court rs

‘ rt.lia_§§._A:V:’dt§_eia§iiin or this count: in the

cauA6.__6£_ .hynI:nJ I, uguntod in
2éczA%’iil’n2:nQuu use. on puuau at

it could be sun that; the

is be: , lackirg material

=pu«;:i¢iaiaua. In tin said aiizuaticn, thi fiiai

, cm was juatifiod in dimiuing the said

eipplication. Howavo.::, it is made clear: that it

the plaintiff worn 1:9 filo proper application

gugnighing the zoquizod particulars, rngaxding

kg u—-.&n–1.3 AL
I I ‘NJ-I-W U

Hi

-I-,
B

and other _xoJ.wam1: materials, the court helm
is directed to consider such app1icnt;:2@”»gftor
providing opportunity at _Li:ho

mfiiasal 3′.-addifii ” A : Ti
upholding by this amt, 4ie’_:l:.x’.”I;’J.
any the trial courf’ froflh
‘P311943-1°” 1:01.101!
to mnintaig atntugédqfihiéd

purfiiifi filinfi
mad:-o _ _ would he in their

intizjat.’ were ta be concluded at

qm~.~ pafidiyivifléafa édnaidoxing the fact that the

fividdd for judgment and decree of

V-.d-3-.5′-*–9-44:-;*.:V.1~’ ir.j”-%..’.*.– in the *-‘-e:: 2994 -.1-.341.

“-‘simian fidaauoa have already Inner: freiuéd, mu

n._I__

.. court is directed to dispose of the suit:

V dxpoditioualy in View of the provisions made

in the Kannatnku can Flaw Rules 2005.

\/

I’ ll

12. In the roault, the writ potitian is
duvo1d.of muxit, fails and is hnruhy §£§m;aacd
aubjact to the obaorvationa mud» sgpr§§@iQra

‘Ila nun!-an _

-It uurwv–r-rs

Psg*