[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
A.V. Anantharamaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 January, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:4315-DB
WA No. 1029 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1029 OF 2025 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. A.V. ANANTHARAMAIAH
S/O VENKATRAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
RETIRED KPTCL ENGINEER
R/O NEAR GAYATHRI PRINTERS
BASAVANAHALLI
CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. MOHAN K N, ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
SREEDHARAN
BANGALORE AND:
SUSHMA
LAKSHMI
Location: High
Court of 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Karnataka RERPESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ
M.S.BUILDING,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
AMBLE GRAM PANCHAYAT
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:4315-DB
WA No. 1029 of 2025
HC-KAR
AMBLE POST
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK
AND DISTRICT - 577 101.
3. ADYAKSHA / THE PRESIDENT
AMBLE GRAM PANCHAYAT,
AMBLE, AMBLE POST
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK
AND DISTRICT - 577 101.
4. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AMBLE PRATHAMIKA KRISHI PRATHINA
SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA
(PRIMARY AGRICULTURE RURAL DEVELOPMENT
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,)
MALALURU
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK
AND DISTRICT - 577 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M N SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. VINOD GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS
PERTAINING TO WP No. 23459/2022 (LB-RES) AND SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2025 PASSED IN WP.No.
23459/2022 (LB-RES) BY ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION AND
ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:4315-DB
WA No. 1029 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The present writ appeal has been filed by the
appellant/petitioner impugning the order dated 20.03.2025
passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition
No.23459/2022.
2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking in
the writ petition, for the sake of convenience.
3. The petitioner had filed a writ petition challenging
the resolution dated 11.02.2020 passed by the Panchayath
Development Officer of Amble Gram Panchayath,
Chikkamagaluru Taluk and District as well as the Adyaksha /
the President of Amble Gram Panchayath, Chikkamagaluru
Taluk and District, whereby the Grama Panchayath had
resolved for transfer of katha in respect of the land, which the
petitioner claims to be the owner, in the name of the Chief
Executive Officer and President of the Amble Prathamika Krishi
Prathina Sahakara Sangha Niyamithya (Primary Agriculture
NC: 2026:KHC:4315-DB
HC-KAR
Rural Development Co-operative Society Limited) (for short
'Co-operative Society').
4. It appears that the father of the petitioner had
taken a loan from the said Co-operative Society. It further
appears that a suit was filed by the said Society for a money
decree in respect of the loan advanced by the Society to the
late father of the petitioner. Execution Petition No.16/1959-60
was filed to recover the decretal amount. Pursuant thereto,
auction proceedings in respect of the said property were
conducted. On the basis of the auction proceedings, the
property was devolved to the respondent No.4 / Co-operative
Society. The judgment and decree passed in Original Suit
No.481/2011 was challenged in Regular Appeal No.21/2019;
however, the same was dismissed.
5. Without disclosing the aforesaid facts relating to the
filing of the suit by Mr. A.V.Ramachandraiah, the father of the
petitioner, and the judgment and decree passed in the said
original suit, as well as the order in Regular Appeal
No.21/2019, the writ petition came to be filed. The Writ Court
NC: 2026:KHC:4315-DB
HC-KAR
dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner
had approached the Court with unclean hands. In execution of
the judgment and decree in Original Suit No.481/2011, some of
the properties were put to auction, which had come into the
possession of the respondent No.4 - Society. The said auction
proceedings could not be challenged after such a long delay.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant /petitioner
submits that the petitioner is the owner of the suit property.
Be that as it may, the suit in which the judgment and decree
was passed, and pursuant to which the auction took place in
favour of the respondent No.4, was an old suit in which the
execution proceedings was initiated, being Execution Petition
No.16/1959-60. In execution of the said decree, the property
in question was auctioned in favour of the fourth respondent.
At this belated stage, the said auction proceedings cannot be
challenged on any ground, that too by filing a writ petition.
7. We, therefore, find no ground to interfere with the
impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. There is
NC: 2026:KHC:4315-DB
HC-KAR
no merit in the writ appeal and accordingly, the writ appeal is
dismissed.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
Bss
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21
