Dismissed¶36

Sri P Das v. the Bengaluru District

Karnataka HC9 Jul 2026WP/10761/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 226 Karnataka High Court writ petition dismissed; negative injunction against statutory authorities refused - court cannot restrain respondent-authorities from performing statutory or public duties; co-operative central bank recovery; Assistant Registrar and Recovery Officer; Tahsildar Bidadi; Encumbrance Certificate and RTC name removal sought; liberty to approach competent authority after adverse action; single judge E.S. Indiresh; decided 09-07-2026; no precedent relied upon.

What did the court decide?

No negative direction or writ can be issued to the respondent-authorities restraining them from performing their statutory or public duties; therefore the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted. ¶31

Sri P Das Vs the Bengaluru District — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:34764 WP No. 10761 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 09^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.10761 OF 2026 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI P DAS S/O LATE P.N.PANCHALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO.56, 2^ND CROSS, NEAR SAMBHRAM COLLEGE, BHEL LAYOUT, M.S PALYA, VIDYARANYAPURA, BENGALURU-560097.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. JAYALAKSHMAMMA K.B., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed 1. THE BENGALURU DISTRICT by CHAYA S A AND RAMANAGARA DISTRICT Location: HIGH COURT OF CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD., KARNATAKA NO.6, LAXMI SADAN, 5^TH MAN, CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU-560 018, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶14

THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR AND RECOVERY OFFICER, BENGALURU, 441, THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,

¶15

¶16

NC: 2026:KHC:34764 WP No. 10761 of 2026

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

BENGALURU-560 018.

¶19

THE TAHSILDAR, BIDADI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT- 562109

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA )

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO REMOVE THE NAME OF THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 ENTERED IN ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE AND RTC COLMUM NO.11 IN RESPECT OF THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY ANNEXURES - 'A' AND 'B'; AND ETC.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:34764 WP No. 10761 of 2026

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

In this writ petition, the petitioner has

¶30

sought for a direction to Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 not to initiate any proceedings against the petitioner in respect of petition schedule property, inter-alia, has also sought a direction to remove the names of Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 from the Encumbrance Certificate and the RTC extracts.

¶31

Having taken note of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that no negative direction/writ can be issued to the respondent-authorities restraining them from performing their statutory or public duties. In that view of the matter, the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted.

¶32

It is, however, open to the petitioner to approach the competent authority to avail such other remedy as may be available in law, in the event any

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:34764 WP No. 10761 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

action is taken by the respondent-authorities affecting the rights of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed .

¶37

SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶38

¶39

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19

Sri P Das v. the Bengaluru District

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri P Das v. the Bengaluru District

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Chikkanna Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Bhimasethu Munivrunda Matha Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Venkatamma Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Smt Gangamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Manjunath Murthy Vs the Tahsildar

Mr. Jagannath Vs the State of Karnataka