Karnataka High Court
Sri Thimmappa vs The Chief Secretary on 17 January, 2022
Bench: N S Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
R.S.A. No.972 OF 2021 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
SRI. THIMMAPPA,
S/O LATE HANUMANTHAIAH,
PRESENT AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
SECRETARY,
VEENA SHARADHA EDUCATION SOCIETY (REGD).,
R/AT KOPPA KADABA HOBLI,
GUBBI TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 219.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.H.N.SHASHIDHAR, SR.COUNSEL FOR
M/S.KESVY AND CO. ADVS.)
AND:
1. THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
AND REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT,
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,
TUMAKURU - 571 112.
2
3. SRI. E. PRAVEEN,
2ND DIVISION ASSISTANT,
DISTRICT REGISTRAR OFFICE,
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,
TUMAKURU
AND ELECTION OFFICER FOR
CONDUCTING ELECTION TO
SRI. VEENA SHARADA EDUCATION (REGD.)
4. SMT. R. VEENA,
SECRETARY,
SHREE VEENA SHARADA EDUCATION
SOCIETY (REGD.),
D/O LATE RAMACHANDRAPPA,
PRESENT AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/AT 'RAMAVILAS',
MAHALAKSHMI WEST,
80 FEET ROAD, 3RD CROSS,
BATAWADI,
TUMAKURU - 572 1103.
... RESPONDENTS
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.10.2021
PASSED IN RA.No.38/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
TUMAKURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.03.2020 PASSED
IN OS.No.489/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE C/C IV
ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TUMAKURU.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff.
2. The plaintiff filed a suit seeking for a declaration to
declare the election notification issued by defendant No.3
on 10.05.2013 to conduct the election on 24.05.2013 to
Veena Sharada Education Society as null and void and also
for a decree of permanent injunction to restrain the
Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Defendant
No.2) and the Returning Officer (Defendant No.3) from
ordering any election to the said Society, contrary to
Section 25(1)(c) of the Karnataka Societies Registration
Act, 1960.
3. It may be pertinent to state here that the plaintiff
had filed the suit on 20.05.2013 challenging the election
notification by which the election was proposed to be
conducted on 24.05.2013.
4. Admittedly, the election was conducted on
24.05.2013, though according to the plaintiff there was no
election conducted in the manner prescribed in the law.
The plaintiff, did not seek for a declaration that the
election that was alleged to have been conducted on
24.05.2013 was null and void.
5. It cannot be in dispute that the plaintiff did not chose
to challenge the election stated to have been conducted on
24.05.2013, even after it was pleaded in the written
statement that an election was conducted on 25.04.2013
and as against seven posts of Directors, seven applications
were received and consequently, all the seven applicants
were elected.
6. I am of the view that since the subsequent election
said to have been conducted on 25.04.2013 was not
challenged by the plaintiff despite being informed of such
election, the prayer of the plaintiff only to declare the
election notification as null and void would be a
superfluous prayer and cannot be tenable.
7. Without going into the merits and demerits of the
judgments passed by both the Courts below, since the
election conducted on 24.05.2013 was not challenged by
the plaintiff, it is obvious that the suit filed by the plaintiff
could not be maintained.
8. There is thus no substantial question of law arising
for consideration in this second appeal and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GH
