Allowed

Rajendra v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Jul 2022WP/12283/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka, in a writ petition filed to quash sale auction notices issued against the petitioner's cooperative property, allowed the petition. The Court held that the notices could not be sustained due to venue irregularities and granted the petitioner liberty to deposit a specific amount to withdraw the property from auction.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed liberty to deposit Rs. 3,50,000 on or before 09.07.2022 to protect property and comply with undertaking timelines.

Rajendra Vs the State of Karnataka — Cooperative Societies | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JULY 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.12283/2022 (CS-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

RAJENDRA S/O AYYA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO 2/290 MANIKYA MANE KOLAMBE VILLAGE KINNAKAMBALA POST MANGALORE - 574152 DAKSHINA KANNADA.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO OPERATION 1^ST FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA DR B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001 REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶12

THE RECOVERY OFFICER N1-441 AND ASST REGISTRAR OF CO OERATIVE SOCIETIES KARNATAKA RAJYA SOUHARDA

¶13

¶14

SAMSTHE SAHAKARA NIYAMITA ALI ASKAR ROAD NEAR RAJ BHAVAN VASANTH NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 052.

¶15

MATHRUBHOOMI SOUHARDHA CO OPERATIVE LTD GURUPURA KAIKAMBA KINNIKAMBALA MANGALURU - 574154 REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. REGISTERED UNDER CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES ACT.

¶16

... RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R1 TO R2; SRI. VITTALA SHETTY P, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SALE AUCTION NOTICE IN FORM NO.8, ISSUED UNDER RULE 17(2)(d) DATED 31.05.2022 IN EP.NO.892/2021-22, AND THE SALE NOTICE IN FORM NO.9 DATED 31.05.2022 IN EP NO.892/2021-22 ISSUED BY THE R2 FIXING THE DATE FOR AUCTION OF PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER ON 09.07.2022 AT 11.00 AM VIDE ANNEXURES-A AND B

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner, whose property situated in Kolambe Village, Mangaluru Taluk, Dakshina Kannada is brought to auction vide the impugned sale notices dated 31.05.2022 (Annexures-A and B), has filed this petition for quashing such notices. The petitioner's grievance with the impugned notices are that they are issued contrary to the Rule 17 of the Karnataka Souharda Co-operative Rules 2004. The petitioner contends that in terms of these Rules, the auction sale should be held either at the property which is proposed for auction or in the prominent property in the immediate vicinity of such property, but the proposed auction is scheduled to be held at the Society's Head Quarters.

¶23

In the light of this grievance and the statement that the petitioner is willing to deposit the award

¶24

¶25

amount to protect the property, the petitioner is permitted to file an undertaking affidavit. The petitioner has now placed such undertaking by way of an affidavit. He has stated that 15% of the notified amount would be deposited on or before 20.07.2022 and the remaining amount deposited within the definite timelines which would be as under:

¶26

15% of the notified amount	on or before 15^thAugust, 2022
20% of the notified amount	on or before 31^st (sic) of September 2022
20% of the notified amount	on or before 31^stof October 2022
30%¹of the notified amount	on or before 31^stof December 2022

¶27

Sri. Rajashekar S., learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner would comply with the undertaking and pay the entire outstanding amount on or before 31.12.2022. This would ensure

¶28

1 Wrongly mentioned as 20% in the Undertaking affidavit

¶29

¶30

that the Co-operative Society is able to recover its dues without any precipitation and litigation.

¶31

This Court, upon considering the grounds urged and the undertaking given by way of an affidavit and upon hearing Ms. H.C.Kavitha, the learned High Court Government Pleader who appears for the authorities, is of the considered view that the impugned notices cannot be sustained and the petitioner must be allowed liberty to deposit Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) with the Co-operative Society on or before 09.07.2022, without waiting for a certified copy of this order and pay the remaining amount in terms of the timelines as mentioned above. It would be needless to observe that if the petitioner commits default in paying either the first amount of Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) or any of the aforesaid amounts as per the timelines indicated, the Co-operative Society should be at liberty to initiate

¶32

¶33

auction in accordance with the Rules for bringing the subject property to sale.

¶34

The petition is allowed accordingly.

¶35

SD/JUDGE

¶36

Rajendra v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri N Janardhan Vs Smt Swetha N

Suryodaya Infra Projects (I) Private Limited Vs Tenova India Private Limited

Sri. G.N. Rajashekar Vs Sri. G.R. Girish

Sri. M.M. Mahadev Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. S. Premalatha Vs the Deputy Registrar of Co. Op Societies

Arun Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka