Sri.Ramesh Nagaraju Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sri.Ramesh Nagaraju Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Review petition allowed; order dated 21.08.2024 in W.P.No.15076/2024 stands recalled; order dated 30.04.2024 passed by respondent No.2 is set aside; liberty reserved to the respondents to approach the appropriate forum seeking appropriate reliefs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 21.08.2024 in W.P.No.15076/2024 ought to be reviewed on the ground that it was caused by an erroneous factual representation — that the petitioner had submitted objections to the renewal application — whereas it was the petitioners who filed the application for renewal and the respondents who filed the objections.

Court's answer

On a perusal of the papers, it was indeed the petitioner who had filed the application for renewal and it was the respondent who had filed the objections.

Ratio / Principle

If the correct facts are taken into consideration — application for renewal by the petitioners and objections by the respondents — then no adjudication could have been made by respondent No.2 under Section 13 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960.

Key takeaways

This error having crept into the order dated 21.08.2024, the order would require review at the hands of this Court.ratio¶57

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Review Petition under Section 114 r/w Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC against the order dated 21.08.2024 of a Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.15076/2024 (GM-RES), by which the petitioners had been relegated to the jurisdictional Civil Court on the footing (following Nanjundaswamy, 2010 (4) Karnataka Law Journal 350) that no adjudication of claims or counter claims could be made under Section 13 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. On review, the Court found from the papers that it was the petitioners who had filed the application for renewal of the society's registration and the respondents who had objected; the reviewed order had proceeded on the mistaken factual premise that the petitioner had submitted the objections. Holding that on the correct facts no adjudication could have been made by respondent No.2 (Deputy Registrar cum District Registrar of Societies) under Section 13 of the Act, and that the error had crept into the order, the Court allowed the review, recalled its order dated 21.08.2024, set aside respondent No.2's order dated 30.04.2024, and reserved liberty to the respondents to approach the appropriate forum for appropriate reliefs.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49439 RP No. 623 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

REVIEW PETITION NO. 623 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

SRI. RAMESH NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, S/O SRI. NAGARAJU, PRESIDENT, M/s KISHORE VIDYANIKETAN SOCIETY (R) NO.5, C BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 092.

PRESENTLY WORKING AT AL MELAHEYAH, RESIDENCE-2, FLAT NO.215, ALL MINA ROAD, NESTO BUILDING, AL HUDAIBIA, DUBAI, UAE.

SRI. NAGARAJU

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, S/O LATE BOMMAIAH, SECRETARY,

M/s KISHORE VIDYANIKETAN SOCIETY (R) NO.5, C BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 092.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. M.R. RAJGOPAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. P. ANAND, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:49439 RP No. 623 of 2024

HC-KAR

DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, M.S.BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR CUM DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, 1^ST ZONE, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, NO.146, SAHAKARA SOUDHA, 8^TH CROSS, 3^RD MAIN, MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560 003.

SRI. ERE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, S/O LATE VENKATEGOWDA, EXECUTIVE MEMBER, M/s KISHORE VIDYANIKETAN SOCIETY (R), NO.5, C BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 092, R/AT NO.7, 1^ST CROSS, GANGAPPA BLOCK, GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 032.

SRI. PUTTARAJU K., AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONERS EXECUTIVE MEMBER, M/S KISHORE VIDYANIKETAN SOCIETY (R), NO.5, C BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 092, R/AT NO.75, 1^ST CROSS, VINAYAKA LAYOUT, BHOOPASANDRA, BENGALURU-560 094.

SRI. RAVI KUMAR K, S/O SRI. ERE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, EXECUTIVE MEMBER, M/S KISHORE VIDYANIKETAN SOCIETY (R), NO.5, C BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 092,

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:49439 RP No. 623 of 2024

HC-KAR

R/AT NO.7, 1^ST CROSS, GANGAPPA BLOCK, GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 032.

SMT. R LALITHAMMA, W/O SRI. ERE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, EXECUTIVE MEMBER, M/s KISHORE VIDYANIKETAN SOCIETY (R), NO.5, C BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR, BENGALURU-560092, R/AT NO.7, 1ST CROSS, GANGAPPA BLOCK, GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU-560032

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SIDARTH BABU RAO, AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI. VARUN J. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5; SRI. R.G. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R6)

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W ORDER XLVII RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 21.08.2024 IN WP NO.15076/2024 (GM-RES).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner is before this Court, seeking for the

following reliefs:

"Review the order passed by this Hon'ble Court dated 21.08.2024 in W.P.No.15076/2024 (GMRES) by review the said order."

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49439 RP No. 623 of 2024

HC-KAR

By way of Order dated 21.08.2024, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.15076/2024 had disposed the said petition reserving the petitioners liberty to adjudicate their rights before the jurisdictional Civil Court on the ground that in terms of decision of this Court in Nanjundaswamy Vs The District Registrar of Societies and Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Gulbarga District, Gulbarga and other reported in 2010 (4) Karnataka Law Journal 350. No adjudication of the claims or counter claims could be made under Section 13 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960.

The above petition has been filed seeking review of the said order.

Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the application for renewal had been submitted by the petitioners

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49439 RP No. 623 of 2024

HC-KAR

and objections had been filed by the respondents, which has been considered and a adjudication done by respondent No.2 after enquiry and the impugned order has been passed.

The perusal of papers indicates that indeed it is the petitioner who had filed the application for renewal and it is the respondent who had filed the objections.

A perusal of the petition indicates that there is an error in the factual representation wherein it has been stated that the petitioner has submitted objections to the application for renewal, which is the cause of the order dated 21.08.2024. If the correct facts are taken into consideration and the application for renewal having been submitted by the petitioners

and objections by the respondents, then no adjudication could have been made by respondent No.2 under Section 13 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. As such, this error having

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49439 RP No. 623 of 2024

HC-KAR

crept into the order, the order would require review at the hands of this Court and as such, I pass the following:

ORDER

(i) Review petition is allowed.

(ii) Order dated 21.08.2024 stands recalled.

(iii) Order dated 30.04.2024 passed by respondent No.2. is set aside.

(iv) Liberty is reserved to the respondents to approach the appropriate forum seeking for appropriate reliefs.

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

SBN

LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 1