Dismissed¶30

Sri.B.P. Pemmaiah v. the Secretary

Karnataka HC5 Aug 2025WP/21748/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Alternate remedy / maintainability: Karnataka HC dismisses writ petition challenging co-operative dispute award of Rs.35,00,000 plus 15% interest; jurisdiction traceable to S.41, Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997; appeal lies under S.46 to Appellate Tribunal; one-month window before enforcement; WP 21748/2025 (CS-RES); Deputy Registrar / Souhardha Sahakari Dispute Panchayat; Articles 226 and 227.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to approach the Appellate Tribunal in accordance with law; one month's time granted; impugned award dated 09.04.2025 not to be enforced during that period unless stayed; Office directed to return the impugned award to the petitioner retaining a photocopy. ¶30

Sri.B.P. Pemmaiah Vs the Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the award passed by respondent No.3 is maintainable when the exercise of power by respondent No.3 is traceable to Section 41 of the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997 and an appeal remedy is provided under Section 46 of the said Act.

¶29

Court's answer

Because the exercise of power by respondent No.3 is traceable to Section 41 of the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997 and an appeal is provided under Section 46 of the said Act, this Court cannot entertain the writ petition.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

The petition is dismissed as not maintainable.

¶30

Key takeaways

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Tribunal in accordance with law; one month's time is granted to avail the remedy of appeal, and until then the impugned award dated 09.04.2025 shall not be enforced; respondent No.3 is at liberty to enforce the award after one month unless it is stayed by the Appellate Tribunal.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (CS-RES) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an award dated 09.04.2025 (Annexure-F) passed by respondent No.3, the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Society, (Ni.441), and the Souhardha Sahakari Dispute Panchayat, directing the petitioner to pay Rs.35,00,000/- with interest at 15% per annum, DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE by the High Court of Karnataka (R. Nataraj, J.). The court held that the exercise of power by respondent No.3 is traceable to Section 41 of the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997, and that an appeal is provided under Section 46 of the said Act; the petitioner's counsel having fairly admitted the appellate remedy, the writ court could not entertain the petition. Liberty reserved to approach the Appellate Tribunal; one month granted; the award not to be enforced in the interregnum unless the Appellate Tribunal stays it; Office directed to return the impugned award retaining a photocopy.

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:30496 WP No. 21748 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 21748 OF 2025 (CS-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. B.P. PEMMAIAH S/O B.A.PUVAIAH, AGED 70 YEARS, R/O 1^ST CROSS, SIDDESHWARA LAY-OUT. BATAWADI, TUMAKURU-5712103

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. PRAMOD R., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BANGALORE-560001

¶14

SHRI VALMIKA SOUHARDHA SARAKARI NIYAMAITHA, S.S.PURAM MAIN ROAD, TUMAKURU, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SHRI VALMIKA SOUHARDHA SAHAKARI NIYAMITHHA, S.S.PURAM ROAD, TUMAKURU-572101

¶15

THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, (Ni.441), AND THE SOUHARDHA SAHAKARI DISPUTE PANCHAYAT, COURT KARNATAKA STATE SOUHARDHA SAMYUKATHA, SAHAKARI LIMITED, SOUHARDHA SAHAKARI SOUDHA, NO.68, 1^ST FLOOR,

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:30496 WP No. 21748 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

17 AND 18^TH CROSS, MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-5600055

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. HARISHA A.S, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 09.04.2025 AT ANNEXURE-F PASSED BY THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, (Ni.441), AND THE SOUHARDHA SAHAKARI, DISPUTE PANCHAYAT, COURT IN VYAJYA SANKE: D R D/KA.RAA.SOW.SUM.SA.NI/119/2024-25 I.E., 3^RD RESPONDENT AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The petitioner has challenged an award passed by the respondent No.3 directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.35,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of default of loan till the date of payment.

¶26

When it was brought to the notice of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the exercise of power by the respondent No.3 is traceable to Section 41 of the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997, and that an appeal is provided under Section 46 of the said Act, the learned counsel for the petitioner fairly admitted that an appeal remedy is provided. In

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:30496 WP No. 21748 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

that view of the matter, this Court cannot entertain the writ petition.

¶30

Therefore, the petition is dismissed as not

¶31

maintainable .

¶32

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Tribunal in accordance with law. One month time is granted to the petitioner to avail the remedy of an appeal and till then, the impugned award dated 09.04.2025 passed by the respondent No.3 shall not be enforced. It is made clear that respondent No.3 is at liberty to enforce the said award after a period of one month from the date of this order unless it is stayed by the Appellate Tribunal.

¶33

Office is directed to return the impugned award

¶34

passed by the respondent No.3 to the petitioner after retaining a photocopy.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶37

SMA/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11

Sri.B.P. Pemmaiah v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.B.P. Pemmaiah v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Shivaraj Basavannayya Swamy Vs the Honble Lokayuktha

Mr M S Krishnan Vs the State of Karnataka

Devidas B Rangadal Vs M/S Pragathi Krishna Gramina Bank

Lanco Infratec Limited Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri K J Narayanaswamy Vs the Managing Director

Sri S Siddaramappa Vs State of Karnataka