Writ petition challenging rejection of an Order VII Rule 11 application raising limitation/delay in a cooperative society dispute. The Court held delay was a mixed question of facts and law to be decided after enquiry and directed completion of proceedings within six months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2026:KHC:23148 WP No. 11178 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 11178 OF 2026 (CS-RES)
BETWEEN:
S/O LATE P RAJU, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, NO. 163/3, SWATHI WOODS, 4TH CROSS, 8TH MAIN ROAD, 14TH BLOCK, NAGARBHAVI 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 027
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NARAYANA BHAT MOVVAR.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. YOGESH D NAIK, AGA FOR R2, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED 27.04.2026)
NC: 2026:KHC:23148 WP No. 11178 of 2026
HC-KAR
THIS W P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER AND GRANT HIM THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTIONS SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SEC. 151 OF THE CPC DATED 31.05.2025 ON IA IN A NI/D AY-2/157/DAVA/70/2022-23 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-H AS THE SAME IS ERRONEOUS.B) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed
to accept notice for respondent No.2. Notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with.
HC-KAR
appearing for the petitioner and Sri Yogesh D Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent No.2.
the Constitution of India to interfere with the pending dispute before the quasi-judicial authority and further
NC: 2026:KHC:23148 WP No. 11178 of 2026
HC-KAR
contended that there is no infirmity in the impugned order at Annexure-H.
considered opinion that the said submission cannot be accepted at this stage and ends of justice would be met if the respondent No. 2 is directed to complete the entire proceedings within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and also the
NC: 2026:KHC:23148 WP No. 11178 of 2026
HC-KAR
respondent no. 2 shall consider the plea raised by the petitioner as to delay in raising the dispute under Section 70 of the Act in the said proceedings.
Sd/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE
HR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Deputy Registrar had jurisdiction to continue the dispute despite the petitioner's plea of delay in raising the dispute under Section 70 of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act.
Whether the order rejecting the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC could be interfered with under Article 227.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
NARENDRA KUMAR B R
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA MILK FEDERATION LTD.
THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR (DIARY AND FARMING) CO OPERATIVE SOCITIES
E.S. INDIRESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
