Allowed¶39

Sri Sai Sujith v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Oct 2025WP/44303/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 44303 of 2014 (GM-RES), High Court of Karnataka, Justice Suraj Govindaraj, decided 23.10.2025 - writ petition allowed; mandamus against Karnataka Rajya Kaigarika Vanijya Sahakara Bank Niyamith to consider depositor/petitioner's representation dated 02.08.2014 seeking refund of amount with interest, within two weeks, per filed audit report and on verification of documents; R1 (State of Karnataka) and R2 (Registrar of Co-operative Society) deleted earlier.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus issued directing Respondents No.3 and 4 to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 02.08.2014 at Annexure-A within two weeks from receipt of a copy of the order, in terms of the audit report filed and upon verification of all documents furnished by the Petitioner. ¶39

Sri Sai Sujith Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:44136 WP No. 44303 of 2014

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 44303 OF 2014 (GM-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI SAI SUJITH, S/O LATE SRINATH, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O NO.407, NORTH EXTENSION, CHIKKABALLAPUR-562 101.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI L CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-01.

¶15

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, ALI ASKAR ROAD, BANGALORE-01. RESPONDENT NO.1 & 2 DELETED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 12.09.2014

¶17

KARNATAKA RAJYA KAIGARIKA VANIJYA, SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITH, NO.11, BULL TEMPLE ROAD, BASAVANGUDI, BANGALORE-04. REPTD. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶18

KARNATAKA RAJYA KAIGARIKA VANIJYA SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITH, B.B.ROAD, CHIKKABALLAPURA,

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:44136 WP No. 44303 of 2014

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

PIN-562 101. REPTD. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

¶22

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, URBAN BANKS DEPARTMENT, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, CENTRAL OFFICE, 1^ST FLOOR, GARMENT HOUSE, DR. ANNIE BESANT ROAD, WORLI, MUMBAI-400018.

¶23

...RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI P H VIRUPAKSHAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4; SRI J SURYANARYANA, ADVOCATE FOR R-5; V/O DATED 12.09.2014 R-1 & R-2 ARE DELETED)

¶25

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 AND 4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 2.8.2014 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A ETC.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the

¶30

following reliefs;

¶31

a. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 3 and 4, to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 2/8/2014, produced at ANNEXURE-A;

¶32

b. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or order or any other appropriate direction to respondent authorities to permit the 4^th Respondent bank to do the business transaction day-to-day basis, by allowing the writ petition, in the interest of justice and equity;

¶33

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:44136 WP No. 44303 of 2014

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

c. Issue such other writ or orders or direction that may deemed proper and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case, be issued in the interest of justice."

¶36

By way of representation dated 02.08.2014 at Annexure-A, the petitioner has sought for refunding the amount with interest. In that view of the matter, I pass the following;

¶37

ORDER

¶38

i. The writ petition is allowed .

¶39

ii. A mandamus is issued, directing respondents No.3 and 4 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 02.08.2014 at Annexure-A within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order in terms of the audit report which has been filed and upon verification of all documents furnished by the petitioner.

¶40

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

Sri Sai Sujith v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sai Sujith v. the State of Karnataka

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.H.G. Shekar Vs Indus Towers Limited

Prateek Sikri Vs M/S Harvest Hotels and Serviced Apartments Private Limited

Sri Suresh v S Vs M/S Unishireskyscapes LLP

Yathisha T Vs the State of Karnataka

Nitesh Residency Hotels Private Limited Vs Reserve Bank of India

Raghu Vs the State of Karnataka