- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26915 WP No. 12927 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 12927 OF 2024 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: DR PARAMEHWARAPPA G B, SON OF LATE GUTHYAPPA BARKI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 108, GUTH CLINIC, AYANURU VILLAGE, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 211. …PETITIONER (BY SRI LEELESH KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, 6TH FLOOR, 3 GATE, MS BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001. 2. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, 1, ALI ASKER ROAD, VASANT NAGAR, BANGALORE-560052. 3. MANAGING DIRECTOR, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD., P.B.NO. 62, BALARAJ ARAS ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA - 577201. 4. RECOVERY OFFICER AND ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD., P.B.NO. 62, BALARAJ ARAS ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA - 577201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI YOGESH D NAIK, AGA FOR R1 AND R2, SRI DAYANANDA S PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4) Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26915 WP No. 12927 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) ORDER SETTING ASIDE / QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE 15/04/2024 BEARING NO. VA.VI./213/2024-25 AT ANNEXURE-E ISSUED BY THE R4, WHEREBY THE PETITIONER IS DIRECTED TO VACATE THE HOUSE PREMISES BEARING NO. 108 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged the sale notice dated 20.04.2024 issued by respondent No.4 in respect of the Writ Petition schedule property, which is sought to be attached and sold to recover the loan amount due to respondent No.3- Cooperative Central Bank. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the Writ Petition schedule property belongs to him, and that he has not borrowed any loan from respondent No.3-Bank. Further, it is contended that he has not mortgaged the said property and for default of a loan borrowed by somebody else, the Writ Petition schedule property cannot be sold. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26915 WP No. 12927 of 2024 3. Per contra, the case of respondent No.3-Bank is that, one G.S.Nagaraj had borrowed a loan from respondent No.3-Bank and he has mortgaged the property concerned and hence, they have initiated auction proceedings against the property for recovery of the loan amount. It is submitted that as the title of the petitioner to the property is disputed, the petitioner is required to file an original suit and the Writ Petition is not maintainable. 4. It is further submitted that since an interim order was passed by this Court, there was no sale of the property pursuant to the impugned sale notice and the entire process of sale is required to be redone. 5. In the light of the same, it is submitted that the Writ Petition has become infructuous. It is also urged that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy under Sections 105 & 106 of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 (‘Act, 1959’) and therefore, the Writ Petition is not maintainable. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26915 WP No. 12927 of 2024 6. Admittedly, the petitioner has challenged only the sale notice and not the award based on which the property is brought to sale. Sections 105 and 106 of the Act, 1959 provide for an alternative and efficacious remedy to any person who is aggrieved by such an award. It provides an alternative remedy against the said award and its execution. 7. As it is a disputed question of fact, as to the title of the property and the right of a person to mortgage the same, this Court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot decide the same. Further, as mentioned by the learned counsel for respondent No.3, the sale sought to be conducted by respondent No.3 has been frustrated and has not taken place. The petitioner has not prayed for any other relief other than challenging the sale process in respect of the Writ Petition schedule property. 8. For the aforementioned reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed as having become infructuous, reserving the liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26915 WP No. 12927 of 2024 forum, in case respondent No.3 decides to proceed once again against the Writ Petition schedule property. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35