Dismissed

Sri. B S Karunakaran v. Shiva Shree Soudhardha Credit Co. Opp., Limited

Karnataka HC17 Jun 2026WP/29440/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging recovery proceedings under the Karnataka Souhardha Sahakari Act was dismissed due to the availability of an alternative remedy. The Court extended the interim order restraining recovery actions by four weeks, reserving liberty to approach the Appellate Authority. No opinion was expressed on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; interim order extending by four weeks; liberty to approach Appellate Authority.

Sri. B S Karunakaran Vs Shiva Shree Soudhardha… — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:29577 WP No. 29440 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 29440 OF 2025 (CS-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. B.S. KARUNAKARAN S/O LATE B.S. NIRANJAN, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT VASUNDARA NIVASA, 15^TH CROSS, SOMESHWARA EXTENSION, TUMKURU - 572 102.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. MANU SHANKAR S.S., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

¶11

AND:

¶12

SHIVA SHREE SOUDHARDHA

¶13

Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

CREDIT CO-OPP. LIMITED, OFFICE AT 7^TH CROSS, ASHOK NAGAR, TUMKURU - 572 103. REPRESENTED BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SRI. PAVAN.

¶15

THE RECOVERY OFFICER AND ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KARNATAKA STATE SOUHARDA SAMYUKTA CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED, NO. 68, 1^ST FLOOR, BETWEEN 17 AND 18^TH CROSS, MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 560 055.

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:29577 WP No. 29440 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

REPRESENTED BY RECOVERY OFFICER HARISH KUMAR B.V.

¶19

SRI. B.N. KUMARASWAMY, S/O LATE S. NIRANJAN, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT SKANDA NILAYA, 16^TH CROSS, S.S. PURAM, TUMKUR - 572 102.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. SPOORTHI V., HCGP FOR R2; R1 AND R3 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED AUCTION NOTICE DATED 08-09-2025 (ANNEXURED) ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT IN EXECUTION PETITION NO. KA.RA.SOU.SAM.SA.NI/SA.SOM.SA.NI/VV.HA109/2025-26, IN PURSUANCE OF THE EX PARTE AWARD DATED 22-01-2025 AND ETC.,

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶25

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:29577 WP No. 29440 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

The petitioner has challenged the recovery proceedings initiated by respondent No.1 - Society pursuant to a default committed in respect to loan advanced. The proceedings have been initiated under the provisions of the Karnataka Souhardha Sahakari Act, 1997 (for short, 'the Act').

¶30

It is seen that the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 46 of the Act. However, this Court had passed an interim order dated 26.09.2025 which reads as under:

¶31

"Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to accept notice for respondent No.2.

¶32

Issue emergent notice to respondent Nos.1 and 3.

¶33

Though this writ petition is not maintainable in view of an alternative remedy before the respondent No.2, since it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is willing to deposit the amount demanded by the respondent No.1 if reasonable time is granted, this petition is

¶34

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:29577 WP No. 29440 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

entertained. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 are restrained from taking any further action pursuant to Annexure - D, subject to the petitioner depositing 50% of Rs.24,11,56,767/- within six weeks and also deposit the balance amount within eight weeks thereafter.

¶38

It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to deposit the amounts as aforementioned, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. In the meanwhile office objections shall be complied.

¶39

Hand delivery of this order is permitted."

¶40

Having noticed that the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy, the Writ Petition is hereby dismissed , reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority in the manner known to law. However, the interim order granted by this Court on 26.09.2025 shall continue for a further period of four (4) weeks from today.

¶41

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:29577 WP No. 29440 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

It is hereby made clear that no opinion is

¶45

expressed on the merits of the case and if an appeal were to be filed, the Appellate Authority shall decide the same in the manner known to law, without being influenced by

¶46

any of the observations made herein above.

¶47

The petitioner shall also be entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, if any appeal were to be filed by him.

¶48

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶49

MCR

¶50

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Sri. B S Karunakaran v. Shiva Shree Soudhardha Credit Co. Opp., Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. B S Karunakaran v. Shiva Shree Soudhardha Credit Co. Opp., Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Chowdeshwari Industries Vs the Principal Secretary

Sri Nagegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Mahammad Ashraf K Vs M/S Shri Saraswathi Credit Souharda Sahakari Ltd.

Mrs. Bibi Jan Vs the State of Karnataka

Yogish Vyasaraya Acharya Vs the Authorized Officer

Smt a Sharath M Vs the State of Karnataka