Hindu Rudra Bhoomi Abhivridhi Samithi v. V.Basheer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.23368/2022 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

¶1HINDU RUDRA BHOOMI ABHIVRIDHI SAMITHI REP. BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT MR. MAXIM JEROLD PINTO AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/A BALIGA HOUSE, MUTTUR VILLAGE KOLAVOOR POST, MANGALORE TQ-574144.

¶2MR. NAGESH SHETTY S/O LATE LOKU SHETTY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/A GARODI MANE MUTTUR VILLAGE KOLAVOOR POST MANGALORE TQ (A MEMBER OF HINDU RUDRA BHOOMI ABHIVRUDHI SAMITHI) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RANJAN KUMAR K, ADV.,)

AND:

¶1V. BASHEER S/O HASANABBA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

¶2SMT. SHAHIDA BASHEER W/O V. BASHEER AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. BOTH ARE R/AT.

by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:42857( W.P.(No.23368/2022( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010537642022( ( ( MARGADANGADI,HOUSE, MUTTUR,VILLAGE, KALAVOOR,POST, MANGALURU,TQ-574144., ,

3., THE,PANCHAYATH,DEVELOPMENT,OFFICER,(PWD), MUTTUR,VILLAGE, KOLAVAOOR,POST, MANGALORE,TQ-574144., , ,

4., MR.,SHAYIKH,SHAHIKA,BASHEER, S/O,V.,BASHEER,@,BASHEER,HASAN, AGED,ABOUT,25,YEARS, R/AT.,MARGADANGADI,HOUSE, DOOR,NO.5-103,,MATHURA,BLOCK,NO.5, MUTTUR,VILLAGE,,KOLAVOOR,POST, MANGALORE,TQ,&,DIST,–,574144., , ,

5., INDIAN,OIL,CORPORATION,LTD, MARKETING,DIVISION,INDIAN,OIL,BHAVAN, ABBAKKA,NAGARM,,KOTTARA, MANGALURU-575006., ,

6., INDIAN,OIL,CORPORATION,LTD, (MARKEING,DIVISION), G-09,,ALI,YAVAR,JUNG,MARG, BANDRA,EAST,,MUMBAI-400051., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,UDAYA,PRAKASH,M,,ADV.,,FOR,R6, ,,,,,,SRI.,VASANTH,KUMAR,BARDILA,,ADV.,,FOR,R1,,R2,&,R4, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,R3,SERVED, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,R5,SERVED), , , THIS,WRIT,PETITION,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLE,227,OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA,, PRAYING, TO, CALL, FOR, THE, RECORDS, FROM, THE, FILE, OF, THE, PRL., CIVIL, JUDGE, AND, JMFC,,MANGALORE,,D.K.,IN,O.S.,NO.,417/2021.,,SET,ASIDE, THE,ORDER,OF,DISMISSAL,DATED,07.07.2022,PASSED,BY,THE, COURT,OF,THE,I,ADDL.,CIVIL,JUDGE,AND,JMFC,,MANGALORE,,

D.K. ON IA NO 6 IN OS NO 417/2021 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ALLOW IA NO 6 & ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated

07.07.2022 passed in O.S.No.417/2021 by the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mangaluru (for short, 'the trial Court').

¶2Heard Sri.Ranjan Kumar K., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.Uday Prakash M., learned counsel for the respondent No.6, Sri.Vasanth Kumar Bardila, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4 and perused the material available on record.

¶3Petitioners had filed a suit in O.S.No.417/2021, against V.Basheer, Smt.Shahida Basheer and the Panchayat Development Officer (PDO), Muthur Grama Panchayat, seeking following reliefs:

"(i) For a Permanent Prohibitory injunction restraining the Defendant No.1 and 2, their men, servants, agents, person or persons claiming from and under them from running retail sale of petrol and diesel outlet (Petrol Pump) in the 'B' Schedule property belonging to 2nd defendant by obtaining or not obtaining permission from defendant 3, the local Panchayath thereby infringing the rights of the plaintiff in plaint 'A' schedule property.

(ii) Granting such other and further reliefs as this Court may deem fit to grant under the circumstances of the case.

(iii) Grant cost of the suit."

¶4In the said suit, the defendant Nos.1 and 2 have filed written statement contending that suit is not maintainable as the defendants have commenced the business of petrol punk in their own property and also stated that the defendant No.2 has executed the lease of 25 cents in favour of Shayikh Shahikh Basheer, who got the dealership outlet from M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., and after obtaining the NOC from Mangaluru Police

Commissioner and other departments, the outlet has started and M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., is not arrayed as party, hence, the suit is liable to be rejected. The plaintiff filed an application under Order I Rule 10(1) and

(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short, 'the CPC') seeking to implead Mr.Shayikh Shahikh Basheer and Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. as defendants. The said application was opposed by the proposed defendants. The trial Court under the impugned order rejected the said application.

¶5It is to be noticed that the relief sought in the plaint is to issue permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendant Nos.1 and 2 from running the retail sale of petrol and diesel outlet in Schedule 'B' property. And during the pendency of said proceedings, the portion of the property was leased in favour of the son of the defendant Nos.1 and 2 and he commenced the business after obtaining the permission from the M/s.Indian Oil

Corporation Ltd. vide letter dated 29.01.2021. The trial Court considering the rival submissions and taking note of the fact that the entire suit of the plaintiffs is based on a particular cause of action and a specific relief is sought against the defendants in the suit and that the application seeking impleadment is impermissible and rejected the said application. I do not find any good grounds to interfere with the impugned order of the trial Court in the present petition. The petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly rejected.

No order as to costs.

Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32