- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30071 WP No. 20537 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 20537 OF 2024 (GM-KSR) BETWEEN: SRI CHANDER BHUSHAN BATRA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE SRI MULK RAJ BATRA RESIDING AT VILLA NO.151 PRESTIGE GOLF SHIRE KARAHALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT LIMITS DEVANAHALLI BANGALORE 562110 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SAMEER SHARMA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY THE REGISTRAR DEPARTMENT OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES NO.1 ALI ASKER ROAD BENGALURU 560052 2. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES BANGALORE RURAL NEERASANDRA VILLAGE DEVANAHALLI BENGALURU 562110 3. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT 2ND FLOOR Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30071 WP No. 20537 of 2024 SAHAKARA SOUDHA NO.146 8TH CROSS 3RD MAIN ROAD MARGOSA ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU 560003 4. PRESTIGE GOLF SHIRE VILLA OWNERS ASSOCIATION A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1960 HAVING OFFICE AT SPORTS ARENA PRESTIGE GOLF SHIRE KARAHALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT LIMITS DEVANAHALLI BANGALORE 562110 REP BY ITS PRESIDENT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. UDAYA HOLLA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. POORNIMA HATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION BEARING NO. DRBR/SOR/64/2021-22, DATED 30/09/2021 ISSUED BY THE R2 IN FAVOUR OF R4 (ANNEXURE- A) BY WAY OF WHICH R4 HAS BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION AS A SOCIETY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30071 WP No. 20537 of 2024 ORAL ORDER The petitioner owns a Villa in a project called Prestige Golfshire [‘the project’], and the petitioner is aggrieved by the Certificate issued by the second respondent registering the fourth respondent under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 [for short, 'the Societies Act'], and hence, seeks quashing of the registration. 2. Mr. Sameer Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that this Court must interfere and quash the registration of the fourth respondent for the following; [a] The fourth respondent is registered for the purposes of maintaining the common facilities in the Project. [b] If the fourth respondent is registered for such purposes, it can’t be under the provisions of the Societies Act and it must be under the provisions of the Karnataka - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30071 WP No. 20537 of 2024 Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 [for short, 'the 1972 Act']. The learned counsel proposes to draw support from the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in VDB Celadon Apartment Owners Association Vs. Praveen Prakash and Ors1. 3. Mr. Sameer Sharma submits that the decision in the aforesaid case must be applied notwithstanding the fact that the sale deed to which the petitioner is a party, does not stipulate the condition that the maintenance of the common areas would be by an Association registered under the 1972 Act. However when queried, the learned counsel fairly submits that the aforesaid grounds are on the inferential reading of the proposition exposited in the decision and the provisions of the 1972 Act. 1 W.A.Nos.974/2019 and 1206-1211/2019 [GM-KSR] decided on 06.11.2019 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30071 WP No. 20537 of 2024 4. As against these submissions, Mr. Udaya Holla, the learned Senior counsel for the fourth respondent invites this Court's attention to the suit commenced in O.S. No.524/2023 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli and submits that the petitioner has filed the suit against M/s. Northland Holding Company Private Limited and others for different relief with an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with 151 of CPC for restraining such entity from extending different services within the project. The learned Senior counsel's submission is to emphasize that the writ petition will not be maintainable with the petitioner having instituted the afore suit and M/s. Northland Holding Company Private Limited not being made party to the present proceedings. 5. In rejoinder, Mr. Sameer Sharma proposing to elaborate submits that the fourth respondent cannot dispute that it has entered into an - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30071 WP No. 20537 of 2024 agreement with the afore entity authorizing such entity to collect common area maintenance and others. 6. This Court must observe that the question whether the fourth respondent is duly registered is also an aspect that will have to be considered in the suit in O.S.No.524/2023 with the petitioner challenging the fourth respondent's authority to enter into an agreement with such entity, and this would essentially mean that all the questions viz., whether by an inferential reading it can be held that only a Co-operative Society would be entitled to maintain common amenities in the project will have to be examined in such suit. There cannot be multiplicity of proceedings and the suit in O.S.No.524/2023 provides an efficacious remedy. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the registration, and the petition must be - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30071 WP No. 20537 of 2024 disposed of leaving open all questions to be canvassed in the suit. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB