(Bysri. H, M PrasVé1d., Advo:e:ate)
AN£):'.' t
1'
_ Ageif} about 7'3 Years.
2 ' * Jfii. Sharikétrappa,
" « _ "S 0 .' "Late Mruthunj aya,
_ A_ged~ab0ut 72 Years.
N THE. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 9"' DAY OF MARCH, 2o1Q,"_t
BEFORE M '
THE HON'BLE ca. JUSTICE K. BHAAKTHA'«'ATS:Ai:.A::: _: "
WRIT PETITION NO5742 01520 T: 1 ?
BETWEEN: ' t' " t' t
1. J. Parashurama, _ '-
S / 0. Late Jinkal Padn.aar1aba**Rec1dy--,_
Aged about 62 Years, ' _ " V.
R/ at Near Park, ' 'A
Vidhya Nagare,
Ch"it1"adurga.. _
2. J. A. Qtreévshé:.}t...';'-_ '
S/0.Jinka;_Anar1tha"E{edd3r,t'
Aged about.eV4O'Yea1';e..,_VV ' ' "
R / at Dcv-ddasidctavanahatlie;t'
Chitradurga Ta.1u1;;:'V-._' *
Chitradu1"gae{)istrtct. ~ ._ w. __
Petitioners
é¢1.1*{.,_ Raj'eSfi_efié1~éiah.
S/'Q. Mruthuhjziya,
3. M. Mahadevaiah,
S/ o. Late Mruthunjaya.
Aged about 65 Years,
4. M. Prabhudevaiah,
S / 0. Late Mmthunjaya,
Aged about 63 Years,
(AB are residing at
Doddasiddvanahalli,
Chitradurga Taluk.
Chitradurga District.) V 2
'.2, Respondents
=a==v=a=* ‘ ~ ::
This Writ Petition is ::”iI_ec£_ u:;1dei~-.._Art’ie,1es 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India, pray*in’gj’to _qu.a:-sh” the order dated
28.01.2010 passed on z.A..–.No–..s in o.s’;~102J/2005 on the file
of Civil Judge, [J:’..I_)Va’1], ChitraJdu.1fgat’a.t A’m;1e’xure–E
This writ”‘petit=io_n”coming o”r1f1’or Preliminary Hearing,
this day. the CO1;1_1fi_ made4_th.e.fo1}owir;gi”
1 -D E R
;The Expetitionefsf defendants No.1 8: 2 in
°:o,s;’1§io;s&j’02’,<,<;005fiiithe file of the Civil Judge, (Junior
A"'I§iv'i_sionI';-«fiihitisadurga, are before this Court, praying
f0r"'qua.shingAthe order dated 281111 January 2010, passed
it on _1..A.'VI.., in the above said suit, at Annexure E.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits,
“the respondent No.1 / plaintiff, at the stage of
L
arguments, filed an application under Order 26 Rule 9
of Code of Civil Procedure, for appointment:”««.’C_of_
Commissioner, for the purpose of measuringiito ~
boundary and also to ascertain ericroaclimentji,f”any,’:_ it
made and submit the reportba
petitioners submits that as ~./the in
AIR 2004 Kar.92 (as. Vs.
Ashwathnaraya Rao lre.ar”n.eld’._.Single Judge
of this Court; at a belated
stage, after lelvidlence and stage of
for appointment of
Commissioner lie cites another decision
reportedp ifr ._:I.L..R. C°.1§§’86 Karnataka R2404 (Patel
. it Chikkeeregowda) on the point
boundaries of lands, maintenance of
bou~nda_:riesC’i’.»of lands or subdivision of lands is the
ll””‘~._ll”‘e;Kclusive:’ jurisdiction of Revenue Courts and the Civil
Courts have no jurisdiction. The decisions cited by the
mleiiarned counsel for petitioners are not applicable as
L
appointment of Commissioner shali be always 3.fter___the
conclusion of the evidence on either side, as the
as well as the Court will be in a position to *
the dispute. In the instant ease..< the nu
has filed the suit for declaration
encroaehed portion. Uridersirrrth the
Trial Court is justified in.p.ai1oLVi'ii§_:'theagipplieatiorii, I.A.VI
filed by the plaintiffs 9 of Civil
Procedure to
survey the' report. I see no
infirrnitjf or impugned order.
fails and the same is
hereby ..dismis sed
Sdféé
Esdsé