Sri Lakshmana Shetty Vs Sri. Thirtha Kumar

RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 ARE R/AT NO.57, SRI RANGANATHA SWAMY NILAYA 1^ST CROSS, H.M. NAYAK ROAD JAI MARUTHI NAGAR, RAVI BADAVANE NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 096

¶25

SRI DAYANAND ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER OFFICE OF ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, [PWD] SUB DIVISION BELUR-573 115

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI M. SRINIVAS KUMAR, A.G.A. FOR R-3; VIDE ORDER DATED NOTICE TO R-1 AND R-2 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF PRAYING TO QUASH THE LETTER NO. ¸ÀA/¸À.PÁ.EA/¯ÉÆÃ.E/G.«/¨ÉÃ®ÆgÀÄ/¸À.EA/ 2024-25 DATED 31.12.2024 ADDRESSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN REFERENCE TO THE FDP 8/2021 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO EXECUTE THE COMMISSION WARRANT ISSUED IN FDP NO.8/2021 ON THE

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:49544 WP No. 24350 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC BELUR, TO MEASURE THE SUIT PROPERTIES AS PER THE PRELIMINARY DECREE PASSED IN OS NO.154/1992 DATED 22.09.1994, (ANNEXURE-C), WITH A TIME FRAME AND TO DISPOSE OF THE FDP EXPEDITIOUSLY MARKED AS ANNEXURE-D.

¶32

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶33

ORAL ORDER

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP appearing on behalf of respondent No.3.

¶35

The petitioners have challenged the letter of

¶36

respondent No.3 addressed to the learned Civil Judge & JMFC, Belur Taluk, Belur dated 31.12.2024, seeking some more instructions. Consequently, the petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus for a direction to respondent No.3-Assistant Executive Engineer, who is appointed as a Court Commissioner, to execute the preliminary decree passed in O.S.No.154/1992 dated 22.09.1994. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the plaintiffs, who filed the suit in O.S.No.154/1992 and the petitioners herein were the defendants before the trial Court. The suit came to be

¶37

decreed for partition and separate possession and the

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:49544 WP No. 24350 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

respective shares were ordered to be allotted to the parties to the suit proceedings by virtue of the judgment dated 22.09.1994 passed in O.S.No.154/1992.

¶41

Respondent Nos.1 and 2 i.e., the plaintiffs therein filed FDP No.3/1995 to effect partition and to demarcate their shares, same was executed by preparing a sketch in detail and the property was divided to the plaintiffs' shares and demarcated the same and possession was also given handed over to them. Thereafter, the present petitioners filed FDP proceedings in FDP No.8/2021 for appointment of Court Commissioner. The Court Commissioner has written a letter dated 31.12.2024 to the learned Civil Judge requiring certain details contrary to the commission warrant issued by the trial Court, which is illegal and arbitrary.

¶42

Respondent No.3 does not have any right to

¶43

dictate terms to the Court to seek for further explanation or escape his obligatory duties to execute the commission

¶44

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:49544 WP No. 24350 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

warrant issued by the trial Court and in view of the memo of instructions and other documents produced to perform his part of the duty. Instead of doing so, he has written a letter to the learned Civil Judge seeking for title deeds and

¶47

the other documents, which are beyond the purview of commission warrant and the powers vested with him to execute the warrant. Therefore, the present petition is filed seeking to quash the order at Annexure- A and for a direction to respondent No.3 to execute the commission warrant as per the memo of instruction, and the commission warrant issued by the learned Civil Judge in FDP No.8/2021.

¶48

Heard learned HCGP on behalf of respondent No.3, who does not have any objection for direction being issued to the Court Commissioner as per the commission warrant issued by the trial Court to execute the same in accordance with law. Accordingly, nothing much remains in this matter as FDP Court has issued a commission warrant for execution and for demarcation of shares and

¶49

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:49544 WP No. 24350 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

handing over possession as per the preliminary decree

¶52

issued by the trial Court. Respondent No.3 cannot go beyond the commission warrant and ask for unnecessary details requiring more documents, which is beyond his purview of scope of the commission warrant as he has no independent right to summon any documents.

¶53

Under the circumstances, what remains to be

¶54

done by respondent No.3 is to execute the commission warrant and file a report to that extent to the Court in accordance with the memo of instructions provided by the parties before the FDP proceedings. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶55

ORDER

¶56

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶57

(ii) The impugned letter dated 31.12.2024 addressed by the respondent No.3 at Annexure-A is hereby quashed.

¶58

(iii) Consequently, respondent No.3 is hereby directed to execute the commission warrant issued in FDP No.8/2021 on the file of the

¶59

7 -

¶60

NC: 2025:KHC:49544 WP No. 24350 of 2025

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

Civil Judge & JMFC, Belur to execute the preliminary decree in O.S.No.154/1992, dated 22.09.1994 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶63

(iv) It is made clear that respondent No.3 shall strictly adhere to the commission warrant, the memo of instructions and any other documents that are provided to him by the FDP Court in the said proceedings.

¶64

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶65

DS

¶66

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4

Sri Lakshmana Shetty v. Sri. Thirtha Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Lakshmana Shetty v. Sri. Thirtha Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahendra Kumar Singhi Vs Mr. M Raja

Smt Lalithamma Vs Sri. G Venkataswamy

Smt. Riyaz Unisa Vs Sri Syed Mubhashir

Jayamma Vs Bhagyamma

Smt. Nagarathnamma Since Dead by Lrs Smt. Vijayashanthi Vs Sri. Hari Krishna

Sri P N Lingaraju Vs Sri H S Janardhan