- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16057 WP No. 11330 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 11330 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: SRI VENKATAREDDY M, S/O MUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/AT. DODDABOMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. …PETITIONER (BY SRI VARUN JAYKUMAR PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI KRISHNAMURTHY N, S/O NAGARAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT. MADARAKALLU VILLAGE, H.K. HALLI POST, KAIVARA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 2. SRI GOVINDAREDDY, S/O VENKATASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT. CHIKKA KATTIGENAHALLI VILLAGE, H.K. HALLI POST, KAIVARA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 3. SRI. RAMANAREDDY.S.M, S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.85, SEEKALLU VILLAGE, MYLANDAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA-563 125. 4. SRI SUBBA REDDY.T, S/O THIMMAYYA, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16057 WP No. 11330 of 2025 R/AT. ANURU VILLAGE, MYLANDAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR-563 125. 5. SMT. LAKSHMI DEVAMMA, S/O NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT. H.K. HALLI POST KAIVARA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 6. SRI SRINIVASA K.N, S/O K.B. CHANNA KRISHNE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT. KURUBURU VILLAGE, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 7. SRI SRIDHAR K.C, S/O K.B CHANNA KRISHNA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT KURUBURU VILLAGE, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 8. SRI SRINIVASAPPA G.M, S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT. GAJALAHALLI VILLAGE, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 9. SRI NAGARAJAPPA G.N, S/O NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT. GADADHASANAHALLI, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI-563 125. 10. THE RETURNING OFFICER, KURUBURU RESHME AND RAITHARA SEVA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, KURUBURU, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 11. KURUBURU RESHME AND RAITHARA SEVA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, KURUBURU, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. REP. BY ITS CEO. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16057 WP No. 11330 of 2025 REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1959. 12. SRI NETAJI GOWDA.K.G, C/O K.T.M. GOOLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT. KURUBURU GRAMA, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 13. SRI NATARAJ K.M, S/O H. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT. KURUBURU GRAMA, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 14. SRI SHIVA REDDY M, S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT. DODDABOMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 15. SRI MALLIKARJUNA GOWDA G, S/O K.T.M. GOOLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT. KURUBURU GRAMA, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 16. SRI VISHWANATH REDDY, S/O RAMASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT. BEDARAHALLI VILLAGE, H.K. HALLI POST, KAIVARA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 17. SRI SRINIVASA GOWDA, S/O LATE KRISHNE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT. SEEKALLU VILLAGE, MYLANDAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA-563 125. 18. SMT. GANGAMMA, W/O MUNIVENKATAPPA, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16057 WP No. 11330 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT. RAJAPURAVILLAGE, H.K. HALLI POST, KAIVARA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 19. SRI MUNVENKATAPPA, S/O NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT. BYALAHALLI VILLAGE, H.K. HALLI POST, KAIVARA HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 20. SRI KRISHNAPPA A.G, S/O GANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT. ANURU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA-563 125. 21. SRI KRISHNAPPA K.M, S/O MUNIVEERANAYAK, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT. KURUBURU VILLAGE, MYLANDAHALLI POST, CHINTAMANI TALUK-563 125. 22. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, CHIKKABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-563 125. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI YOGESH D NAIK, AGA FOR R10 & R22; SRI V.B SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R4 TO R9; NOTICE TO R11 TO R21 IS D/W V/O DATED 16.04.2025) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21.03.25 IN DISPUTE NO. 07/20-21 PASSED BY THE R22 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, B) ALLOW THE APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ORDER 18 RULE 17 R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC IN DISPUTE NO. 08/202-21 BEFORE THE RESPONDNET NO.21 VIDE ANNEXURE-C. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16057 WP No. 11330 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Sri.V.B.Siddharamaiah, learned counsel who has filed vakalathnama for respondents No.1 to 9, they being the petitioners in dispute No.7 of 2020-21. 2. Notice to respondents No.11 to 21 is dispensed with since they are the co-respondents of the petitioners. 3. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; a. Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 21.3.2025 in dispute No.07/2020-21 passed by the respondent No.22 vide Annexure-D. b. Allow the applications filed by the petitioner under order 18 Rule 17 r/w section 151 of CPC in Dispute No.07/2020-21 before the Respondent No.21 vide Annexure-C. c. Such other writ or order as direction as deemed fit as circumstances of the case including an order for costs. 4. The petitioner is before this Court challenging the order dated 21.03.2025 in dispute No.7 of 2020-21 passed by respondent No.22 vide Annexure-D rejecting the request of the petitioner to recall PW-1 for cross-examination. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16057 WP No. 11330 of 2025 5. The submission of Sri.Varun Jayakumar Patil., learned counsel for the petitioner is that; 5.1. The petitioner has a good case on merits. By inadvertence, they could not cross-examine PW-1 in the aforesaid proceedings. If a date is fixed, on the very same date the petitioner would cross-examine PW-1 without availing of any further adjournment. 5.2. If cross-examination is not conducted of PW-1, the matter relating to election dispute, the petitioner being the returned candidate, he would suffer irretrievable harm and injury. 6. Sri.V.B.Siddaramaiah., learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 9 submits that the above petition is completely misconceived, several adjournments have been granted to the petitioner, despite the adjournments having been granted the petitioner has not utilized the opportunities and it is only when the matter was posted for arguments that - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:16057 WP No. 11330 of 2025 the application came to be filed, and it is on that basis that respondent No.22 has rejected the said application. 7. Heard Sri.Varun Jayakumar Patil., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Yogesh D.Naik., larned AGA appearing for respondents No.10 & 22 and Sri.V.B.Siddaramaiah., learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 to 9. Perused papers. 8. The proceedings under Section 72(C) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act 1959, (hereinafter referred to as “KCS Act”), had been filed raising a dispute as regard the election of the petitioner who is respondent No.13-therein. Thus, any order which is going to be passed in the said proceedings would affect the election of respondent No.13. 9. Though Sri.V.B.Siddaramaiah., learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 9 is right in contending that - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:16057 WP No. 11330 of 2025 several adjournments have been granted, despite which the petitioner did not cross-examine the witness, now that a categorical undertaking has been made by Sri.Varun Jayakumar Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, that cross-examination will be conducted on any date fixed by the respondent No.22, I am of the considered opinion that one more opportunity has to be granted to the petitioner, subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- payable to the Advocates Clerks Benevolent Fund. 10. In that view of the matter, I pass the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is partly allowed. ii. The order dated 21.3.2025, passed by respondent No. 2 in dispute No.7 of 2020-21 at Annexure-D is set aside. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:16057 WP No. 11330 of 2025 iii. Consequently, the application under order 18 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC, filed in the said proceedings at Annexure-C is allowed. iv. Taking into consideration submission of learned AGA, that PW1 will be kept present on 28.4.2025, learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to cross-examine said PW-1 on 28.4.2025 without seeking for any adjournment. v. Only in the event of the cross-examination not being completed on that date, could respondent No.22 ARCS grant another suitable date. vi. In the event of PW1 being present on 28.4.2025 and the petitioner not cross- examining PW-1 on that date, the above order will stand rescinded with liberty being reserved to respondent No.22 to proceed with the matter from that stage. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37