Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 25391 Kant
Judgement Date : 24 October, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:15482
WP No. 106709 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT PETITION NO.106709 OF 2018 (CS-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI CHANDRASHEKHAR S/O. RUDRAYYA MATHAD,
AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: RAMAPUR SITE, NO.2805,
SINGARGOPP ROAD, SOUNDATTI,
TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SHIVARAJ P. MUDHOL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, BAILHONGAL,
TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. JYOTI PATTAN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,
BAZAR ROAD, SOUNDATTI, TQ: SOUNDATTI,
DIST: BELAGAVI, REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHIEF EXECUTIVE.
Digitally signed
by YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
3. THE DEPARTMENTAL ARBITRATOR,
Location: High AND CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
Court of
Karnataka SOUNDATTI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 AND R3 ARE SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE WRIT IN THE
NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND
ORDER DATED 26.07.2018 IN APPEAL NO.205/2011 PASSED BY THE
KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALURU VIDE
ANNEXURE-"A" AND JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.11.2019
PASSED BY THE ARBITRATOR VIDE ANNEXURE-"B". TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 TO SETTLE THE MATTER WITH THE
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:15482
WP No. 106709 of 2018
PETITIONER UNDER ONE TIME SETTLEMENT BY REDUCING THE RATE
OF INTEREST AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING - B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)
The present writ petition is filed seeking for the following
reliefs:
"1. To issue writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned judgment and order dated 26.07.2018 in appeal No.205/2011 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangaluru vide Annexure-A and judgment and award dated 26.11.2019 passed by the Arbitrator vide Annexure-B.
2. To direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to settle the matter with the petitioner under one time settlement by reducing the rate of interest and justice.
3. To direct the 2nd respondent not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner."
2. The relevant facts in nutshell leading to the present
writ petition are that the petitioner along with others had
NC: 2024:KHC-D:15482
availed financial assistance from respondent No.2-Society.
Since the amounts due and payable are not paid, the
respondent No.2-Society instituted proceedings under Section
70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 19591. The
Arbitrator, by order dated 26.11.2010, allowed the said dispute
and ordered that the respondents therein including the
petitioner are liable to pay a sum of ₹3,78,235/- together with
interest @ 23% per annum. Being aggrieved, the petitioner
preferred an appeal in Appeal No.205/2011 before the
Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru2. The Tribunal, by its
order dated 26.07.2018, partly allowed the said appeal and
reduced the rate of interest to 17%. Being aggrieved, the
present writ petition is filed.
3. This Court, by interim order dated 10.07.2019,
granted stay of the award dated 26.11.2010 subject to
petitioner depositing ₹50,000/- within four weeks from that
day. It is relevant to note that the petitioner had consented to
make the deposit. However, till date, the deposit has not been
made.
Hereinafter referred as "the 1959 Act"
Hereinafter referred as "the Tribunal"
NC: 2024:KHC-D:15482
4. The sole contention urged by the petitioner before
this Court was that the petitioner was not notified before the
award was passed. The same contention was urged by the
petitioner before the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering the
same and appreciating the material on record has recorded a
finding that the notices which have been issued by the
Arbitrator, have been served on the petitioner.
5. Having regard to the fact that the availing of credit
facilities itself is not disputed and having regard to the fact that
the petitioner has been notified of the proceedings by the
Arbitrator, the petitioner has failed to make out any ground for
grant of relief sought for in the present writ petition.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as being
devoid of merit.
Sd/-
(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE
YAN CT-ASC
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!