- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12506 WP No.4518 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.4518 OF 2026 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: SRI BASAVARAJA MUSHAPPAGOL @ BASAVARAJA SIDDAPPA MUSEPPAGOLA S/O LATE SIDDAPPA MUSEPPGOL, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT ANANDPUR, HATTARGI, HUKKERI BELAGAVI - 591 243. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AKSHAY RAMACHANDRA HUDDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEKDAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. M/S HEBBAL URBAN CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LIMITED HEBBAL, HUKKERI TALUK, BELAGAVI - 591 243. REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. 3. RECOVERY OFFICER (RULE-441) AND ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES KARNATAKA STATE SOUHARDA SAMYUKTA SAHAKARI NIYAMITA, Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12506 WP No.4518 of 2026 'SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SOUDHA', NO.68, 1ST FLOOR, BETWEEN 17TH & 18TH CROSS, MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 055. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE SALE NOTICE DATED 18TH DECEMBER, 2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-A; AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the Sale Notice dated 18th December, 2025 (Annexure-A) issued by the respondent No.3. 3. Heard Sri. Akshay Ramachandra Huddar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12506 WP No.4518 of 2026 4. Having taken note of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful examination of the impugned Sale Notice, the same would indicate that the respondent No.3 had already passed award against the petitioner. In that view of the matter, unless the said award is challenged, subsequent event of challenging the Sale Notice does not arise. 5. Therefore, reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the award as prayed for by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, writ petition is disposed of as not maintainable. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23