- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36467 MSA No. 118 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 118 OF 2017 (RO) BETWEEN: 1. DR B R SHETTY MAJOR, THE PRESIDENT, BRS HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE PVT LTD. NG-17, NORTH BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, MANIPAL CENTRE, DICKENSON ROAD, BANGALORE-560 042. 2. BRS HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE PVT LTD. NG-17, NORTH BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, MANIPAL CENTRE, DICKENSON ROAD, BANGALORE-560 042. REPTD., BY ITS DIRECTOR DR.SHISHIR SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O SACHIDANANDA SHETTY R/AT ROSHNI, KADRI ROAD, MANGALORE, D.K.DISTRICT- 575003. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHOBHITH N SHETTY.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KHURSHID AHMED AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, S/O LATE MOHAMMED USMAN SAHEB, (RETD. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER OF LIC OF INDIA), R/AT D.NO.10-2-23/4, BADAGUPETE, UDUPI, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT- 576101. Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36467 MSA No. 118 of 2017 2. ARSHAD HUSAIN AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O LATE A.S.RASHEED HYDER R/AT D.NO.A1401, NAGAR JUERA PREMIER, 100 FEET RING ROAD, J.P.NAGAR, 6TH PHASE, BANGALORE, BY HIS GPA HOLDER 1ST PLAINTIFF. 3. SHYAMARAJ BIRTHI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O NARAYANA MASTER, BHEEM GRAHA, 52 HEROOR VILLAGE AND POST, BRAHMAVARA, 576 213, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 4. BOGRA KORGA KOKKRANE, S/O GIRIYA, NEAR KOKKARANE PANCHAYATH, PEJAMANGOOR VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT- 576257. 5. PANIRAJU K S/O NEELAKANTA RAO, 5-188, 1ST CROSS, V MAIN, V.P.NAGAR, UDUPI- 576104. 6. PRO.MURALIDHARA UPADYA HIRIYADKA SAKEEGEETHA DODDANAGUDDE, UDUPI- 576102. 7. AFROZE BANU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, W/O SHAFI AHMED, GULFAM, D.NO.5-2915, V.P.NAGAR, 1ST MAIN CROSS, MANIPAL UDUPI ROAD, POST KUNJIBETTU, UDUPI TALUK- 576 102. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36467 MSA No. 118 of 2017 8. BALAKRISHNA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O LATE A.MAHALINGA SHETTY, CITU OFFICE, BYLOOR COMPLEX, PPC ROAD, UDUPI. 9. U.KISHORE SHETTY S/O LATE P.VITTAL SHETTY, RAMPRASAD BUILDING, NEAR KEB, MARUTHI VEETHIKA, UDUPI- 576101 10. HUSAIN AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, S/O LATE USMAN SAHEB, GENERAL SECRETARY, UDUPI ZILLA MUSLIM OKKUTA, R/AT SALIHATH MOHALLA, TONSE, HOODE POST-576 115 UDUPI TALUK & DISTRICT. 11. NISHAT FATHIMA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, W/O I MUSHEER AHAMED, THE CASTLE APARTMENT, FLAT NO.1204, NEAR BRAHMAGIRI, UDUPI-576 101 12. MOHAMMED SIKANDER ALI, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, S/O LATE M.NASEEB SAHEB, NASEEB MANZIL, D.NO.4-3-73 C1, VIVEKANANDA, 6TH CROSS, NEAR FIRE STATION, AJJARKAD, UDUPI-576 101 13. SADIK ABBU HAJI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O LATE ABBU HAJI, 7-53-MI, VISHNUMOORTHY - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36467 MSA No. 118 of 2017 NAGAR, NITTOOR, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT-576103. 14. MRS.P.MEENAKSHI V BHANDARY AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, W/O VARADARAYA BHANDARY, VENKATESHWARA KRIPA, MANJUNATHA NAGARA, MARKET ROAD, PARKALA, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT-576107. 15. ISHIRATH KHAIRULLAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, W/O B.KHAIRULLAH, MASJID HOUSE, D.NO.101, POST BAILOOR-574 102, KARKALLA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT. 16. RAMIZA RAHAMATH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, W/O MOHAMMED IBAL MANNA, SAI RADHA PRIDE, FLAT NO.101, A WING, NEAR BRAHMAGIRI CIRCLE, CONVENT ROAD, UDUPI- 576 101 17. SYED SIRAJ AHMED AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, S/O LATE A.S.BASHEER AHMED, F 1003, AJMERA GREEN ACRES APARTMENT, KALENA AGRAHARA, B.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 076 REPTD. BY HIS GPA HOLDER 1ST PLAINTIFF. 18. SAGHEER BANOO W/O ABDUL KHADER, A1-AIN, D.NO.5-146, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36467 MSA No. 118 of 2017 5TH MAIN, V.P.NAGAR, INDRALI, POST KUNJIBETTU, UDUPI TALUK-576 102. 19. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPT. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE- 560 001 20. THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE REPT. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE- 560 001. 21. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF UDUPI DISTRICT, RAJATHADRI MANIPAL, UDUPI DISTRICT- 576104. 22. DR.MADHUSUDAN NAYAK S/O SUBBANNA N DISTRICT SURGEON, UDUPI DISTRICT- 576101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMED NIYAZ.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R18; SRI. GOPALKRISHNA SOODI, AGA FOR R19 TO R21 R22 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD10.07.2017 PASSED IN RA.NO.40/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, UDUPI., ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 18.04.2017 PASSED ON IA.NO.8 IN OS.NO.231/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. C,J JMFC., UDUPI., ALLOWING THE IA.NO.8 FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(a) AND SECTION 151 OF CPC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36467 MSA No. 118 of 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri Shobith N. Shetty, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Mohamed Niyaz. S, learned counsel for contesting respondents 1 to 18 and Sri Gopalakrishna Soodi, learned AGA for respondents 19 to 21. 2. Though the matter is listed in the 'Orders List' for accepting the Memo, the matter is taken up for further consideration by consent of the parties, in view of the pendency of the suit in respect of another lis. 3. Memo dated 28.11.2024 filed by learned Additional Government Advocate is placed on record, wherein it is indicated that possession of the suit property has been taken by the Government. Memo is taken on record and contents noted. 4. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for the disposal of the present appeal are as under :- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36467 MSA No. 118 of 2017 A suit came to be filed in O.S.No.231/2017 for the relief of not to change the name of Hospital. The claim came to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC. The same was challenged before the First Appellate Court. The learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after considering the material on record allowed the appeal and set aside the order of rejection of the plaint by judgment dated 10.07.2017 in R.A.No.40/2017. 5. Remitting the matter to the Trial Court is called in question in this second appeal. 6. Since the property has already been taken possession by the Government as the per memo, suit in respect of permanent injunction not to interfere with the possession of the suit property would not survive for consideration in the suit. Insofar as changing the name of the Hospital, suit would survive only to that extent of plaintiff seeking a judgment from the Trial Court with regard to the change of name. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36467 MSA No. 118 of 2017 7. As such, the remand order needs to be maintained only in respect of attempt of changing the name of the Hospital. 8. With that observation, the appeal can to be disposed of reserving the rights of the parties to urge, only with regard to relief of change of name of the Hospital. 9. Hence the following :- ORDER a. The instant appeal stands disposed of. b. The Trial Court is directed to proceed with the suit only in respect of change of name sought for by the plaintiff. c. Since possession of the suit property is already taken by the Government, relief of injunction would not survive for consideration. Ordered accordingly. SD/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2