MR MOHIYUDDIN ABDUL HAQ GORIKHAN vs SHRI KRISHNA LAXMAN PATIL
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16162
WP No. 108215 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020176102026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 28 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT PETITION NO.108215 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
MR. MOHIYUDDIN
ABDUL HAQ GORIKHAN,
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: PLOT NO. 181, SECTOR 5,
SHREE NAGAR,
BELAGAVI 590 001.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRASHANT F. GOUDAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. KRISHNA LAXMAN PATIL,
AGE: 45 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: RANAKUNDE,
BELAGAVI - 590 001.
Digitally signed
by SAROJA
HANGARAKI
Location: high
court of
karnataka,
dharwad bench
2. MOHAMMED FAROOQ
ALLAHBAKSH SAVADATTI,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: VISHNU GALLI, VADAGAON,
TALUK AND DISTRICT: BELAGAVI – 590 001.
3. ANAND LAXMAN GOSAVI,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: DEEPA DEVELOPERS/CONSTRUCTIONS,
ST
1 FLOOR, MEDPLUS,
VINAYAK NAGAR,
NEAR HINDALAGA GANPATHI TEMPLE,
BELAGAVI – 590 001.
4. THE SUB REGISTRAR KHANAPUR,
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16162
WP No. 108215 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020176102026
TAHASILDAR OFFICE, KHANAPUR,
BELAGAVI – 590 001.
5. LAXMAN NAGANGOUDA PATIL,
AGE: 84 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: RANAKUNDE,
BELAGAVI – 590 001.
6. YALLAPPA LAXMAN PATIL,
AGE: 53 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: RANAKUNDE,
BELAGAVI – 590 001.
7. MANOHAR LAXMAN PATIL,
AGE: 46 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: RANAKUNDE,
BELAGAVI - 590 001.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE ORDER
PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., KHANAPUR IN
O.S. NO. 111/2022 IN IA NO. 1, DATED 13.02.2026, ALLOWING THE
APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 A AND 2 R/W
SECTION 151 OF CPC., PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-A. TO
CONSEQUENTLY, ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE
ORDER OF DISMISSAL PASSED BY THE VI ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI IN MISC. APPEAL NO. 26/2026 DATED
27.07.2025 PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16162
WP No. 108215 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020176102026
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition is by the proposed impleading applicant in
O.S.No.111/2022 pending consideration on the file of
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Khanapura being aggrieved
by the order dated 13.02.2026 passed in the said suit on
application filed by plaintiff/respondent No.1 herein under
Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC restraining defendant
Nos.1 to 3 from creating any further transaction or
encumbrance in favour of any bank / society / public
showing any loan transactions in respect of the suit
schedule property, which is confirmed by order dated
27.07.2025 in Miscellaneous Appeal No.26/2026 on the file
of VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject
property was purchased by defendant No.1/respondent
No.2 herein from the plaintiff/respondent No.1 herein, in
terms of deed of sale dated 27.04.2021. He submits that
after the purchase of the suit property, defendant No.1 had
sold the said property in favour of one Mr.Vijay Katkar in
terms of deed of sale dated 21.07.2022 as per Annexure-E.
Thereafter said Vijay Katkar has sold the said property in
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16162
WP No. 108215 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020176102026
favour of the proposed impleading applicant/petitioner
herein in terms of deed of sale dated 04.05.2024 as per
Annexure-F.
3. That the above suit in O.S.No.111/2022 has been filed by
plaintiff/respondent No.1 herein only against the vendor of
Vijay Katkar without making him as the petitioner as a
party respondent to the said suit and has obtained
impugned order restraining them from alienating or
creating any third party interest over the suit schedule
property.
4. Learned counsel brings to the notice of this Court, the
reasons assigned by the Trial Court as well as the First
Appellate Court to contend that merely because the
respondents/defendant Nos.1 to 3 had refused to
undertake not to alienate the property, the Trial Court and
the First Appellate Court have held plaintiff/respondent
No.1 herein had made out a prima facie case which runs
contrary to the canons of law. Therefore he submits that
the impugned orders passed by the Trial Court, which
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16162
WP No. 108215 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020176102026
confirmed by the First Appellate Court requires to be
quashed.
5. Heard and perused the records.
6. The suit in O.S.111/2022 is filed by plaintiff/respondent
No.1 herein for relief of declaration and partition. Though it
is admitted that a deed of gift dated 12.07.2019 was
executed by his father in his favour, conveying the said
property, which he in turn has sold it to defendant No.1 in
terms of deed of sale dated 27.04.2021, there is allegation
of misrepresentation, undue influence and fraud being
exerted by defendant No.1 in obtaining the said sale deed
from plaintiff/respondent No.1. It is under these
circumstances the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court
have found it appropriate to preserve the right, title and
interest of the suit schedule property until disposal the
suit. Said order cannot be found fault with.
7. However, in view of the subsequent development, namely
defendant No.1/respondent No.2 herein having sold the
subject property in favour of Katkar, who in turn has sold
the property to the petitioner herein and since the said
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16162
WP No. 108215 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020176102026
purchasers have not been made party to the suit, an
application came to be filed by the petitioner herein
seeking impleadment, which has not been considered yet.
In other word petitioner herein is not even a party to the
said suit.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this juncture submits
that if a direction is issued to the Trial Court to consider
the application filed by the petitioner, reserving liberty for
him to seek such relief as may be permissible, purpose of
this petition would be served.
9. Submission is placed on record.
10. Since the impugned order is merely direction to respondent
Nos.2 to 4 not to create any third party interest, this Court
do not see any reason to interfere at this juncture.
11. Since the petitioner's application to come on record is still
pending consideration, the Trial Court shall consider the
same in accordance with law and pass appropriate order.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16162
WP No. 108215 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020176102026
12. The petitioner is at liberty to seek such further relief before
the Trial Court as may be permissible and advised in the
circumstances.
13. Petition is accordingly disposed of.
14. In view of disposal of the writ petition, pending
applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and
the same are accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL)
JUDGE
EM/CT: ASC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20