- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35756 WP No. 25781 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 25781 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: MR. VINOD S/O SARASU SUVARNA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS. R/AT HOUSE NO.1.158/IA, "SHRI VARSHINI" BADANIDIYOOR VILLAGE UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 115. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, 1ST FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (NI.441), SOUHARDA CO-OPERATIVE DISPUTES REDRESSAL COURT, KARNATAKA STATE SOUHARDA FEDERAL CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED, "SOUHARDA SAHAKARA SOUDHA", NO.68, 1ST FLOOR, 17TH AND 18TH CROSS ROAD, MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU-560 055. 3. MEENU MARATAGARARA VIVIDHODDESHA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LIMITED, Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35756 WP No. 25781 of 2025 A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR, MANDAVI MERIDIAN, UDUPI-576 101 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REGISTERED UNDER SOCIETY ACT, 1960 4. SMT. SARASU SUVARNA, W/O DASU THINGALAYA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT HOUSE NO.1.158/1A, "SHRI VARSHINI" BADANIDIYOOR VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 115. 5. SMT. VEENA, W/O NATARAJ, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT HOUSE NO.13-3001, SRI VASUNDHARA NARGI PADLA, KODAVOOR VILLAGE AND POST, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 115. 6. MR. NATARAJ, S/O SUNDAR KUNDAR, R/AT HOUSE NO.13-3001, SRI VASUNDHARA NARGI PADLA,J KODAVOOR VILLAGE AND POST, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 115. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2; VIDE ORDER DATED 10.09.2025, NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NOS.3, 4, 5 AND 6 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 08.05.2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DISPUTE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35756 WP No. 25781 of 2025 NO.DRD/KA.RA.SOU.SAM.SAM.SA.NI/545/2024-25 VIDE ANNEXURE- A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged an award passed by the respondent No.2 dated 08.05.2025 in Dispute No.DRD/Ka.Ra.Sou.Sam.Sa.Ni/545/2024-25 vide Annexure -A. 2. The sum and substance of the case of the petitioner is that the property bearing Sy.No.105/2 of Badanidiyoor village, Udupi Taluk measuring 11 cents stood in the name of respondent No.4, who had raised loan of Rs.15,00,000/- from the respondent No.2 for constructing a house and thereafter repaid it, which was acknowledged by respondent No.3 vide receipt dated 05.04.2014. The petitioner claims that after such repayment he had purchased the said property in terms of a sale deed dated 30.04.2022. He contends that the revenue records of the property so purchased was transferred to his name. However long thereafter, the respondent No.3 caused a notice dated 15.11.2023 demanding more than a sum of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35756 WP No. 25781 of 2025 Rs.30,00,000/- and claimed that the property in question was mortgaged by the mother of the petitioner for a loan raised by the respondent Nos.5 and 6. This was followed by the proceedings initiated by the respondent No.3 before the respondent No.2 for recovery of a sum of Rs.26,86,721/- along with interest of Rs.5,20,880/- and other expenses totaling to a sum of Rs.32,86,653/-. The respondent No.2 held proceedings and in terms of his award dated 08.05.2025 directed recovery of a sum of Rs.32,86,653/- by proceeding against the property bearing No.105/2 of Badanidiyooru Village, Udupi Taluk. The petitioner is therefore, before this Court challenging the said award. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when once the respondent No.3 had confirmed that the loan raised by the mother of the petitioner was cleared, the respondent No.3 could not have renewed its claim in respect of the property in question. He also contends that the mother of the petitioner neither signed on any documents nor mortgaged the property in question for a loan raised by the respondent Nos.5 and 6. He therefore contends that the impugned award is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35756 WP No. 25781 of 2025 liable to be interfered as the same was passed behind the back of the petitioner. 4. The learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the petitioner has right of an appeal under Section 46 of the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997 and therefore this writ petition is not maintainable. Besides this, he contends that the mother of the petitioner was a party to the proceedings before the respondent No.2 and it was incumbent upon her to establish that she had not mortgaged the property for a loan raised by the respondent Nos.5 and 6. He therefore, contends that no indulgence can be shown to the petitioner in this writ petition. 5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2. 6. As rightly contended by the learned Additional Government Advocate, the question whether the property in question was mortgaged by the mother of the petitioner for a loan raised by the respondent Nos.5 and 6 cannot be gone into - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35756 WP No. 25781 of 2025 in a proceeding under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India, as that would involve adjudication of disputed questions of fact. If the mother of the petitioner was a party before the respondent No.2, she and the petitioner were bound to establish the said contention before respondent No.2. 7. Be that as it may, as the petitioner now claims that he is the present owner of the property, he is bound to challenge the award passed by the respondent No.2 before the appropriate authority in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However, the liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the concerned appellate authority in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20