Disposed¶56

Marian Peres Bhatt v. Sadananda Poojary

Karnataka HC19 Sept 2025WP/7860/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC, WP 7860/2021 (GM-CPC), decided 19.09.2025 by Justice M.G.S. Kamal; impleadment application (Order I Rule 10 CPC) rejected by III Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC Mangaluru upheld via disposal with clarificatory directions limiting MESCOM-suit reliefs to plaint 'A' schedule; necessary-party dispute over Sy.No.36-2/AP land; Article 227 writ; no costs or quantum.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with clarification restricting plaintiff's suit reliefs to 'A' schedule property only, without affecting petitioner's rights over his property; petitioner free to seek other legal remedies if adversely affected ¶56

Marian Peres Bhatt Vs Sadananda Poojary — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:37815 WP No. 7860 of 2021

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 7860 OF 2021 (GM-CPC)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MARIAN PERES BHATT AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O LATE G P BHATT R/AT SUMMER DELIGHT LIGHT HOUSE HILL MANGALURU - 575 001.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. ABISHEK MARLA M J., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SADANANDA POOJARY

¶15

S/O LATE GIRIJA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT KELARAI, POOJARY HOUSE

¶16

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶17

THIRUVAIL VILLAGE VAMANJOOR POST MANGALORE TALUK - 575 028.

¶18

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) KULSHEKAR SUB DIVISION MESCOM, MAROLI, MANGALORE D.K - 575 005.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. ROOPESHA B., ADVOCATE FOR R1(VC) SRI. H. V. DEVARAJU., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶21

¶22

NC: 2025:KHC:37815 WP No. 7860 of 2021

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.02.2021 PASSED ON I.A.NO.IV FILED IN O.S.NO.476/2020 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MANGALURU, DK (PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY TO ALLOW I.A.NO.IV AS PRAYED FOR.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

This petition is by the petitioner who sought to implead himself as party/defendant in O.S.No.476/2020, which is filed by the respondent No.1 herein seeking following reliefs:

¶29

"For a declaration to declare that the alleged Letter dated 20-06-2020 vide Reference No. ಸ�ಾ�ಇಂ / ಕುಉ / ಸಇಂ ( �ಾಂ ) /2021/ 1002, issued by the Defendant, as null and void.

¶30

For mandatory injunction directing the Defendant, its men, servants, agents or any other persons claiming through under them, to provide electricity connection to the 3 HP electric motor, morefully stated in the 'B' schedule property, in the interest of justice.

¶31

For permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the Defendant, its men, servants, agents or any other persons claiming through under them, from sanctioning/giving any electricity connection for electricity motor or for any other purposes, in any other person's name, apart from the Plaintiff, in the 'A' schedule property, in any manner, in the interest of justice.

¶32

For the cost of the suit."

¶33

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:37815 WP No. 7860 of 2021

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

The subject matter of the suit is property bearing Sy.No.36-2/AP (as per Land Tribunal order) also bearing Sy.No.36/2AP3 (as per RTC) measuring an extent of 1 acre 45 cents bounded on:

¶37

North by: Survey Line and Water Channel South by: Portion of the same Sy.No. & property belonged to the Plaintiff East by: Survey Line and Village Boundary of Bondanthila Village i.e., the property belonged to the Plaintiff. West by: Survey Line and the property belonged to the Plaintiff.

¶38

The said suit has been filed against Assistant Executive Engineer, MESCOM, who in his written statement has taken up a plea that upon their personal inspection they found pumpset is connected to a well which is in possession of one Mr.Marian Peres Bhatt and he is necessary party to the suit. Therefore suit is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary party.

¶39

It is in this background present petitioner has filed an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC seeking to implead himself as defendant No.2. The said application came to be rejected by the trial Court. Aggrieved by which present petition.

¶40

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:37815 WP No. 7860 of 2021

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Learned counsel for petitioner taking this Court through the writ petition papers submits that respondent No.1/plaintiff has filed the above suit seeking relief which directly affects the rights of the petitioner/impleading applicant. Therefore, he is necessary party. He submits that the total extent of the land in the aforesaid survey number No.36/2A is 3 acres, the plaintiff is entitled only to an extent of 1 acre 45 cents. However, the plaintiff/respondent No.1 is seeking relief which would directly affect the rights of the impleading applicant in respect of remaining extent of land. He also refers to an order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in writ petition No.3788/2025 dated 05.08.2025 against the State and its revenue authorities and others. Hence seeks for allowing of the petition.

¶43

Learned counsel representing respondent through

¶44

video conferencing submits that the property subject matter of the present petition is described in plaint `A' schedule which was granted by the Land Tribunal exclusively in favour of mother of the respondent No.1/plaintiff which order has attained finality and he is not seeking any right directly or

¶45

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:37815 WP No. 7860 of 2021

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

indirectly beyond his rights over the plaint `A' schedule property which is measuring 1 acre 45 cents. He further submits that respondent No.1/plaintiff is not seeking any right, interest or relief directly or indirectly beyond the property to which he is entitled to, more particularly against the petitioner herein. Therefore, he submits the petitioner herein is not a necessary party to the present proceedings.

¶48

Heard and perused records.

¶49

The only grievance of the petitioner in present petition is that the nature of relief being sought for by the respondent No.1/plaintiff would adversely affect his interest in he enjoying his portion of the property forming part of the same survey number, though not specifically mentioned in the plaint.

¶50

However, perusal of the affidavit accompanying the application seeking impleadment does not provide any details or grounds on which the petitioner/impleading applicant is seeking to be impleaded as a party defendant in the said suit. No irregularity or illegality can be found in the order impugned.

¶51

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:37815 WP No. 7860 of 2021

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

Learned counsel for petitioner/impleading applicant after arguing the matter for sometime submits that if a clarification is provided to the effect that the relief being sought for by the respondent No.1/plaintiff in the above suit would be restricted specifically only to the extent of his property described in the plaint 'A' Schedule and which shall not be read or used against the interest of the petitioner/impleading applicant, the purpose of this petition would be served.

¶54

Learned counsel for the respondent No.1/plaintiff has no objection for the same.

¶55

Submissions taken on record.

¶56

In that view of the matter, petition is disposed of with the following clarification:

¶57

(i) That the relief being sought for by the respondent No.1/plaintiff in the above suit shall be restricted only to the extent of the property mentioned in "A" schedule to the plaint and the same shall not be read directly or indirectly to affect the rights of the petitioner/impleading applicant over his property.

¶58

¶59

NC: 2025:KHC:37815 WP No. 7860 of 2021

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

(ii) The petitioner/impleading applicant is at liberty, if

¶62

required and advised to seek such remedy as may be

¶63

available under law.

¶64