Dismissed

M/s Gajanand Kirodimal v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Chhattisgarh HC17 Sept 2026WPC/123/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed a writ petition filed by partners of M/s Gajanand Kirodimal challenging the termination of their BPCL retail outlet dealership. The court held that by efflux of time, the reliefs sought — quashing of the termination order and permission to run the outlet — could no longer be granted, rendering the petition infructuous.

What the court decided

AI extract

M/s Gajanand Kirodimal Vs Bharat… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

PRIYANKA VERMA

¶3

Digitally signed by PRIYANKA VERMA Date: 2026.09.21 15:37:24 +0530

CGHC010300432020

2026:CGHC:40763

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶8

WPC No. 123 of 2021

¶9

M/s Gajanand Kirodimal A Partnership Firm Under The Partnership Act, 1956 Having Its Registered Office At BPCL Petrol Pump Civil Lines Manendragarh, District Korea (C.G.), Through Tis Partner Kamal Kumal Kejriwal S/o Late Shri K.M. Agrawal, Aged About 49 Years

¶10

Satyanarayan Kejriwal S/o Late K.M. Agrawal Aged About 58 Years Partner M/s Gajanand Kirodimal R/o Civil Lines, Manendragarh, District Korea, Chhattisgarh

¶11

... Petitioners

¶12

versus

¶13

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Through Territory Manager, 46 Shahid Veer Narayan Singh Bhawan, Nagar Ghadi Chowk, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶14

Head Retail West, bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Plot No. 6, Sector-2 Kharghar, Navi Mumbai-410210

¶15

Assistant Manager (Sales) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited 46 Shahid Veer Narayan Singh Bhawan, Nagar Ghadi Chowk, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

For Petitioners	: Ms. Aprajita Pandey, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Harsh Wardhan, Advocate
For Respondents	: Ms. Harneet Kaur holding the brief of
	Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate

¶18

¶19

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶20

Order on Board

¶21

18/09/2026

¶22

The petitioners, in this Writ Petition, has prayed for the following

¶23

reliefs:-

¶24

“10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may be kindly pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner, in the possession of the respondents, for its kind perusal.

¶25

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the termination order dated 25.11.2020 (ANNEXURE-P/22) alongwith all consequential benefits. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to run his retail outlet.

¶26

10.4 That, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant any other relief which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10.5 That, the Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case may further be pleased to grant cost of the petition to the petitioner.”

¶27

By efflux of time, the relief sought by the petitioners cannot be granted. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the petition has become infructuous.

¶28

Consequently, the petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)

¶31

Judge

¶32

Priyanka

M/s Gajanand Kirodimal v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M/s Gajanand Kirodimal v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases