Disposed

Sri Madhukar Ranganath v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Oct 2021WP/2134/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Writ Petitioner challenged non-consideration of representations regarding invoices from a cooperative society. The Court disposed of the petition, directing the Deputy Registrar to address grievances within eight weeks. It granted provisional relief for amenities on par with other owners if the petitioner pays half the usual charge.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of by directing the third respondent to address the petitioner's grievance within eight weeks and granting provision for amenities on par with other owners if half the c

Sri Madhukar Ranganath Vs State of Karnataka — Cooperative Societies | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.2134 OF 2021(GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI.MADHUKAR RANGANATH, S/O SRI.BASAVARAJ RANGANATH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OWNER OF FLAT NO.: S 605 & T 602, ROHAN JHAROKA II APARTMENT, KEMPAPURA, BELLANDUR, BENGALURU – 560 037.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. MALLAHAR RAO, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF CO-OPERATION, M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶13

THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVES SOCIETIES, NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 052.

¶14

THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, III DIVISION, BENGALURU CITY, NO.146, SAHAKARA SOUDHA, 2^ND FLOOR, 3^RD MAIN ROAD, 8^TH CROSS, MAARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU – 560 003.

¶15

ROHAN JHAROKA II OWNERS ASSOCIATION, YEMALUR MAIN ROAD,

¶16

¶17

KEMPAPURA , YEMALUR, BEHIND HAL AIRPORT, BENGALURU – 560 037. REPRESENTED BY MANAGER.

¶18

… RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. SRIDHAR HEGDE, HCGP FOR R1-R3; SRI. MITHUN GERAHALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED INVOICES BOTH DATED 01.06.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND E ISSUED BY R4 AND ETC.,

¶21

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Regardless of the bulky petition paper book, the essential grievance of the petitioner remains to be against non-consideration of his representations dated 03.10.2019, 17.11.2019, 09.01.2020, 30.09.2020 & 27.01.2021 qua the impugned notices issued by the fourth respondent at Annexures D & E. Petitioner counsel heavily banks upon a Coordinate Bench decision rendered in W.P.No.36600/2018 (GM-RES) between SRI MADHUKAR RANGANATH Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS, disposed off on 05.10.2018 a copy whereof is at Annexure-F, in support of his case.

¶24

¶25

Learned HCGP having resisted the writ petition for some time, now submits that if a reasonable period is granted by the Court, there would be no difficulty for considering petitioner’s representations in accordance with law. This is fair enough.

¶26

Learned HCGP also submits that such a consideration of the representations would take place keeping in view the Hon’ble Bombay High Court judgment in VENUS COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY VS. J Y DETWANI, LAWS(BOM)-200-7-127 . This fair stand of the answering respondent is appreciable.

¶27

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed off directing the third respondent to address the grievance of petitioner in accordance with law.

¶28

The fourth respondent is directed to provide all usual amenities to the petitioner on par with rest of the apartment owners if he pays one half of the amount otherwise chargeable.

¶29

It hardly needs to be stated that this provisional arrangement is subject to outcome of the proceedings in

¶30

¶31

which the third respondent would take a decision, within

¶32

eight weeks.

¶33

All contentions are kept open,

¶34

costs made easy.

¶35