Gururaj N. K v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Mar 2026WP/8265/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Challenge to co-operative society recovery auction (Form Nos.8 and 9 auction notice, Annexures 'A' and 'B') issued by the Assistant Registrar / Recovery Officer of Co-operative Societies (NI-441) concerning debtors of Pranava Souharda Sahakari Sangha Ltd.; petitioners Gururaj N.K. and Namitha Gururaj of Mangaluru. Held: auction notice cannot be challenged while the underlying competent-authority award remains unchallenged; liberty given to assail the award. Karnataka High Court, WP No.8265 of 2026, decided 12 March 2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of, with liberty reserved to the petitioners to challenge the award before the competent authority; no adjudication on the auction notice challenge. ¶¶37

Gururaj N. K Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:14768 WP NO.8265 OF 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.8265 OF 2026 (CS-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

GURURAJ N.K. S/O NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

¶10

MRS. NAMITHA GURURAJ W/O GURURAJ N.K., AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.

¶11

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT: FLAT NO.302, INLAND MAJESTIC, WARE HOUSE ROAD, MANNA GUDDE, MANGALURU - 575 003.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SMT. KAVITHA N., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION SOCIETY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶17

THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, THE RECOVERY OFFICER OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, (NI-441) 73, 'E' MAIN ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:14768 WP NO.8265 OF 2026

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

PRANAVA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD. (REGISTERED UNDER CO-OPERATIVE ACT) REP. BY ITS C.E.O./AUTHORIZED OFFICER, D.NO 3-3/9 AND 3-3/11, 1^ST FLOOR, JAYARAM PRASAD, AIRPORT ROAD, YEYYADI, KANCHADY POST, MANGALURU - 575 008.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA FOR R1 AND R2)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH FORM NOS.8 AND 9 AUCTION NOTICE DATED 23^RD FEBRUARY, 2026 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURES 'A' AND 'B' INSOFAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED; AND ETC.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government

¶29

Advocate accepts notice for respondents 1 and 2.

¶30

In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the Auction Notice dated 23^rd February, 2026 (Annexures 'A' and 'B') issued by the respondent No.2 in respect of the property of the petitioner is concerned.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2026:KHC:14768 WP NO.8265 OF 2026

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Heard Smt. Kavitha N., learned counsel appearing

¶35

for the petitioner and Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2.

¶36

Having taken note of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful examination of the impugned Auction Notice, the same would indicate that the petitioner had not questioned the original award passed by the competent authority. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that, unless the award is challenged, subsequent event of challenging the Auction proceedings does not arise.

¶37

Therefore, reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the award before the competent authority as prayed for by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, writ petition is disposed of .

¶38

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶39

ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Gururaj N. K v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gururaj N. K 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

Yadavani Primary Agriculture Vs the State of Karnataka

Raghavendra Naik K Vs Assistant Registrar of Co. Operative

The Chief Secretarty Vs H S Madhava Bhat

Mr. Anindya Dutta Vs M/S Fabdiz Private Limited

M/S Kids Clinic India Limited, Vs Dr. Nitika Sobti

M/S Excellent Industries Vs M/S Vikrash Excellent India