Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

H.Ram Praksh Reddy vs The Joint Registrar Of Co-Op Socieites
2024 Latest Caselaw 3566 Kant

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 3566 Kant
Judgement Date : 6 February, 2024

Karnataka High Court

H.Ram Praksh Reddy vs The Joint Registrar Of Co-Op Socieites on 6 February, 2024

Author: Suraj Govindaraj

Bench: Suraj Govindaraj

                                           -1-
                                                   NC: 2024:KHC-D:2587
                                                     WP No. 81706 of 2013




                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

                                 DHARWAD BENCH

                  DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

                                         BEFORE
                  THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
                  WRIT PETITION NO. 81706 OF 2013 (GM-CFA)
             BETWEEN:

             SRI. H.RAM PRAKSH REDDY,
             S/O H RAJGOPAL REDDY,
             AGE:44 YEARS,
             R/O: H.NO.2A, SEETARAM NIVAS,
             K.C.ROAD, BELLARY.

                                                              ...PETITIONER
             (SRI. H.RAM PRAKSH REDDY, PETITIONER (ABSENT))

             AND:

             1.   THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIEITES
                  GULBARGA REGION, RAICHUR.

             2.   THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
                  CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES & CHITFUNDS
                  BELLARY DISTRICT, BELLARY.
Digitally
signed by
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR   3.   M/S MODEL CHIT CORP (KARNATAKA) LTD.,
                  BY ITS FOREMAN, ROOM NO. 1,
                  BHEEMAREDDY COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR,
                  SOUTHERN GRANITES, KAPPAGAL ROAD, BELLARY.

             4.   SRI.G SEETHARAM REDDY,
                  S/O G THIMMANAGOUDA,
                  AGED MAJOR,
                  R/O: H.NO. 2A, SEETARAM NIVAS,
                  K.C.ROAD, BELLARY.

             5.   SRI.R P ABDUL GHANI,
                  S/O ABDUL AJEEZ,
                  AGE: MAJOR,
                                 -2-
                                       NC: 2024:KHC-D:2587
                                           WP No. 81706 of 2013




     C/O: ILAHI MOTORS,
     VADDARABANDA,
     BELLARY.

6.   SMT.SOUBHAGYAMMA
     W/O H RAJGOPAL REDDY,
     AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
     R/O: H.NO.2A, SEETARAM NIVAS,
     K.C.ROAD, BELLARY.

                                                    ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.PRAVEEN UPPAR, AGA FOR R-1 & R-2;
    SRI.S.C.BHUTI, ADVOCATE FOR R-6;
    R-4 HELD SUFFICIENT;
    R-5 SERVED)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED:21.08.2009 IN DISPUTE
NO.54/2008-09/499 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, VIDE
ANNEXURE-B A THE SAME WAS PASSED IN VIOLATION OF NATURAL
JUTICE AND AGAINST THE PROVISION FO LAW AND ALSO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 10.12.2012 PASSED IN
APPEAL No.1/2011-12 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT, VIDE ANNEXURE-D,
ETC.

      THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                             ORDER

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the

following reliefs:

a. To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned Judgment and order dated 21-08- 2009 in Dispute No.54/2008-09/499 passed by the 2nd Respondent, vid Annexure-B as the same was passed in violation of natural justice and against the provision of law and also set aside the Judgment and Order dated 10.12.2012 passed in

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2587

Appeal No.1/2011-12 by the 1st Respondent, vide ANNEXURE-D, and

b. To issue any other order or writ or direction that this Hon'ble Court may deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The counsel for the petitioner was appointed as a

judicial officer. As such, notice was directed to be

issued to the petitioner. Notice having been served

on the petitioner and the name of the petitioner

being printed in the cause list, there is no

appearance on behalf of the petitioner nor is the

petitioner present before this Court. It therefore

appears that the petitioner is not interested in

prosecuting the matter. Hence, the Writ Petition is

dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

PRS

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter