IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 34178 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SRI. R SRINIVASA MURTHY S/O. LATE K. RAMAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1383, FIRST FLOOR, 4^TH CROSS, 10^TH MAIN ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. KRISHNAMURTHY .M.R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SRI. R SATHYANARAYANAN S/O. LATE K. RAMAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1383, 1^st FLOOR, 4^TH CROSS, 10^TH MAIN ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR, Digitally BENGALURU-560 040.

signed by CHANDANA

2. SMT. R. KUSUMAVATHI, B M D/O LATE K. RAMAKRISHNA, Location:

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, High Court of RESIDING AT NO.28, S.V.G NAGAR, Karnataka MUDLAPALYA, BENGALURU-560 072.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BHASKAR BABU, H.J, ADVOCATE)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLESE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED ON I.A NOS.2 AND 3 FILED UNDER SECTION 2 AND 3 OF PARTITION ACT AS PER ANNEXURE-L DATED 10.09.2025, PASSED BY THE XXXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS), (CCH-35), BENGALURU OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER/S, AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEM FIT TO PASS ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

This petition by the respondent in FDP No.125/2023 on the file of XXXIV Addl.City civil and Sessions Judge & Spl.Judge (NDPS), Bangalore, is directed against the impugned common orders passed on I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of the Partition Act filed by the respondents herein were allowed by the trial court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondents instituted a suit in O.S.No.3452/2015 against their brother against their brother, the petitioner herein for partition and separate possession of their legitimate 1/3^rd share each in the In the suit schedule residential property. The said suit having been contested by the petitioner-defendant, the trial Court passed the judgment and decree dated 18.07.2023 decreeing the suit in favour of the respondents against the petitioner. The said judgment and decree passed by the trial Court in O.S.No.3452/2015 dated 18.07.2023 has attained finality and become conclusive and binding upon the petitioner. Subsequently, the respondents instituted final decree proceedings in F.D.P.No.125/2023 to enforce and implement the said preliminary decree passed by the trial Court. In the said final decree proceedings, the trial Court appointed a court commissioner to ascertain and submit a report as regards the feasibility / partibility/ divisibility of the suit schedule property. Accordingly, in pursuance of the said direction issued by the trial Court, the court commissioner submitted a report interalia stating that the suit schedule property is incapable of being divided by metes and bounds into three equal shares in terms of the preliminary decree. The petitioner filed objections to the report of the court commissioner. Thereafter, since the suit schedule property was incapable of being divided by metes and bounds, the respondents filed two applications under the Partition Act. Respondent No.1 filed an application seeking direction for public auction of the suit schedule property; so also, respondent No. 2 filed an application seeking permission to purchase the suit schedule property on the market value fixed by the valuator. By the impugned common order, the trial Court allowed both the applications, aggrieved by which, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

4. While arriving at the said conclusion, the trial Court held as under:-

COMMON ORDERS ON IA U/S.2 AND 3 OF THE PARTITION ACT 1893, FILED BY THE PETITIONERS The petitioners