A.V. Anantharamaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

AMBLE PRATHAMIKA KRISHI PRATHINA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA (PRIMARY AGRICULTURE RURAL DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,) MALALURU CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT – 577 101.

¶27

…RESPONDENTS

¶28

(BY SRI. M N SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R1; SRI. VINOD GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶29

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS PERTAINING TO WP No. 23459/2022 (LB-RES) AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2025 PASSED IN WP.No. 23459/2022 (LB-RES) BY ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.,

¶30

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶32

3 -

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:4315-DB WA No. 1029 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶36

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶37

The present writ appeal has been filed by the appellant/petitioner impugning the order dated 20.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.23459/2022.

¶38

The parties are referred to as per their ranking in the writ petition, for the sake of convenience.

¶39

The petitioner had filed a writ petition challenging the resolution dated 11.02.2020 passed by the Panchayath Development Officer of Amble Gram Panchayath, Chikkamagaluru Taluk and District as well as the Adyaksha / the President of Amble Gram Panchayath, Chikkamagaluru Taluk and District, whereby the Grama Panchayath had resolved for transfer of katha in respect of the land, which the petitioner claims to be the owner, in the name of the Chief Executive Officer and President of the Amble Prathamika Krishi Prathina Sahakara Sangha Niyamithya (Primary Agriculture

¶40

4 -

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC:4315-DB WA No. 1029 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

Rural Development Co-operative Society Limited) (for short ‘Co-operative Society’).

¶44

It appears that the father of the petitioner had taken a loan from the said Co-operative Society. It further appears that a suit was filed by the said Society for a money decree in respect of the loan advanced by the Society to the late father of the petitioner. Execution Petition No.16/1959-60 was filed to recover the decretal amount. Pursuant thereto, auction proceedings in respect of the said property were conducted. On the basis of the auction proceedings, the property was devolved to the respondent No.4 / Co-operative Society. The judgment and decree passed in Original Suit No.481/2011 was challenged in Regular Appeal No.21/2019; however, the same was dismissed.

¶45

Without disclosing the aforesaid facts relating to the

¶46

filing of the suit by Mr. A.V.Ramachandraiah, the father of the petitioner, and the judgment and decree passed in the said original suit, as well as the order in Regular Appeal No.21/2019, the writ petition came to be filed. The Writ Court

¶47

5 -

¶48

NC: 2026:KHC:4315-DB WA No. 1029 of 2025

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner had approached the Court with unclean hands. In execution of the judgment and decree in Original Suit No.481/2011, some of the properties were put to auction, which had come into the possession of the respondent No.4 - Society. The said auction proceedings could not be challenged after such a long delay.

¶51

The learned counsel for the appellant /petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the suit property. Be that as it may, the suit in which the judgment and decree was passed, and pursuant to which the auction took place in favour of the respondent No.4, was an old suit in which the execution proceedings was initiated, being Execution Petition No.16/1959-60. In execution of the said decree, the property in question was auctioned in favour of the fourth respondent. At this belated stage, the said auction proceedings cannot be challenged on any ground, that too by filing a writ petition.

¶52