1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH
AT DHARWAD
Dated this the 18*'-1 day of December, 2008
BEFORE
'mm Hormm MR. JUSTICE H. Kuasgfii if
Writ Pemion N0. 3031: of 2098 (Cm4'r3£§<:1 _ "
Between: V ' ' V ' ' V
Hatxumazxtappa
S] 0 Maflappa Ambali
Age 46 years
Occ: Agriculture
R 1' 0 Holalu
Tq. Huviuahadagaii
Dist. Bellary
{ /' Associates, Advocates)
EL'
" '~ ..... .. V
V . V VS'; 9 P11tta.ppai" Shantagpanaar
Age 46. year*s%%% 2
"£"}c:c~'_: Agricultux'-6.
Rf0'r§o1;a}z1' f 'j_
' Tq. Eiuvijflahaéagaii
' . V. [Dist Befiary Respondent
(By M] s. Ravivarma Kama: Assuciates,
Advocates)
This Writ Peiifion is filed under Articles 226 and 22′? of
hmtim Canstitufion of India, praying to quash the order dated 26~
V ‘?–~2008 Vida A1:mexum–F’ passed by the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.),
Huvinahadagali 01:1 IA No.16 Ciatcd 26-7′-2008.
is)
This Writ Pefifion coming on for prefiminarja hfléfifig in
‘B’ Group this day, the Court made the following: ‘V —
The petiiiioner has challenged in Aorfiiuctr.
passed by the: trial Court on LA.
Rule 9 mad with Sanction 15,1 §)f (iPC_,T fr>r
surveyor as Court commissionéf» II’1€a’.SVilI”V§f2″‘VV1.}IL(:3 of’
the parties which is V V’ ‘
2. pxaimxifg has g1g§1_ of title,
manda%;g:1y._ i:1jfi11:¢:ti§5:1 possassion. It is the specific
case cf tbs. t’::hs: £i cafencian<; has encroached upon a
portir§i1"0f respect of which not only he Wants
'tlzcévl a:§Vi"'«¢_;mandator3a' injtmctien but also a decree for
I ficféndant has denied the": aiiegation. issues are
fiémcd. the para':-7:3 have adduced evidence. it is
V"¥hcreaf;t:e1.;:' the defendant has fiieé the appfication for
'~§})'}§}OizIi@L€3II1t of a surveyor as commissioner to measure both
yropertics in order to find Gut Whether there is any
encroachment as allagefi. by the ylaintifi'. The said appiicaition
1,//..
3
was opposed by the plaintiff on the grcatmd that priorhto the
filing of the suit the preperty was surveyed after no§i::§;”.§%§)~..tha
defendant. Surveyor has pmpared a
cucmachment which is in his porfionfgtnd u
in evidence and as {he defendant hafif
he cannot get over that dacumgnt §Jy!’ ‘II1fiE.3’1g”V~’.
surveyor appainteti as a pending
pmceadjngs’ T116 trial the rival
cententiens has 0v6:r~ruIc:§1V’V”:’l;,;g:’ has appointed
the commissian er) V *
T*h.£=: _;f>foduc£d in the case showing
e:ncmachm§§n.f; i3 fiat by the defendant. “Unless he
_ admitfig the”q*.3¢stiQ:f1 of getting over that document Wonk}
I1iOf’,*&IiSf;.’ rate that is a document which has come into
$$é€Si€%:;<::?§"1*»':'$if*;iz;_r'~Ti;§::xfi1e fling of the suit which eniy wouid be a
V _ pieCé"*0f =..§:€zi%.1EI1c:a ti) substanfiata the case of the piaintiif.
H .i{.»§Tii*i3V:I2 a3:-:1:1§;r' is for the Ceuri ta decide whether the defendant
T._f£1:=@,é"'cfic1w:3ached upon any portion 0f the plain: schesiule
' = prdpertyy. when the parties are contes'tiI1g the matter, after the
" Vevicience if the Court feels it naeds the assistaxixce of a surveyor
and a report by him to resofve the aforesaid issuega1r1d;
a comnfissionczr in iis discretion it cajzncat Hbc"'~-§3ai=d '*f$1at' 'tbr;
discretion is not exercised by t.,}:1ef'f;ri:–:a'.'1"COQ11-I'i§3.__.Va.%§V1;6;i€;i0'i;:$
maxmer. it cannot be characterized asV'pmverscjgcifcétpiidiousg.?
In that View of the matter, 13:) ca-ssxé'Vf0r i121tfi:"fCf(¥';I1:(3€ is made out.
Acconciingly, thc Writ Pettfigiorx
Sd/".'
Judge