- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34698 WP No. 2361 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.2361 OF 2026 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: 1. CHANDRAPPA DEMAPPA HARIJAN OCCUPATION: COOLLE S/O DEMAPPA HARIJAN AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS OLD R/O. HALGIMARADI GRAMA, BENDIGERI POST, BELGAVI-591 109. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAWA PRASAD KUNALE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES KARNATAKA STATE SOUHARDA FEDERAL COOPERATIVE LTD., BELGAVI BENCH, #119/B, KANNABARGI INDUSTRIAL AREA, NEAR RURAL AYURVEDIC COLLEGE, AUTONAGAR, BELGAVI-590 015. 2. M/S. KITTU RANI CHANNAMMA URBAN CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LTD. REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34698 WP No. 2361 of 2026 HAVING A REGISTERED OFFICE AT MRUTYUNJAY NAGAR, BELGAVI ROAD, BAILAHONGAL-591 102. 3. NEELAYYA CHANDRAPPA HARIJAN OCCUPATION: COOLIE S/O DEMAPPA HARIJAN AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS OLD R/O. HALGIMARADI GRAMA, BENDIGERI POST, BELGAVI-591 109. 4. MAHADEVI ASHOK TALWAR OCCUPATION: COOLIE D/O ASHOK TALWAR AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS OLD R/O. HALGIMARADI GRAMA, BENDIGERI POST, BELGAVI-591 109. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA., FOR R.1; VIDE ORDER DATED 09.07.2026 NOTICE FOR R.2 TO R.4 IS DISPENSED WITH.) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.10.2025 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU, IN COP APPEAL NO.20/2025, CONFIRMING THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE, BELGAVI, DATED 14.08.2024 ANNEXURE-A, ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34698 WP No. 2361 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. Admittedly, the petitioner had borrowed a loan of Rs.50,000/- from respondent No.2 - Bank and committed default in repayment of the same. Hence, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner before respondent No.1 and an exparte order was passed against the petitioner for recovery of the loan along with the due interest. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal by way of COP. Appeal No.20/2025. 2. The Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT), after analysing the material placed on record, arrived at the following conclusion: ”11. It is significant to note that borrowing of loan to the tune of Rs.50,000/- and execution of loan papers have not been denied by the Appellant. There is no material placed on record to show that the Respondent No.2 Society has charged excessive and exorbitant rate of interest. No material on record is produce by the Appellant to show that he has paid the part of the loan amount and the said amount has not been deducted by the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34698 WP No. 2361 of 2026 Respondent No.1 while passing the impugned order. The Respondent No.2 Society has produced the bank statement of loan account pertaining to the Appellant wherein there is no mention with regard to the payment made by the Appellant towards the repayment of the loan." 3. Based on the aforementioned conclusions, the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal passed the following order: ”O R D E R 1. The delay of 100 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 2. The appeal filed by the Appellant u/s.46 of the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997, is hereby dismissed. 3. Consequently, we confirm the impugned order/award passed by the Respondent No.1 in Dispute No.rDgïr/PÀ.gÁ.¸Ë.¸ÀA.¸À.¤./151/2024-25 dated 14.08.20024. 4. The Registrar of the Tribunal is directed to comply with Regulation 53(a) of Chapter-IX of Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Regulations - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34698 WP No. 2361 of 2026 1979 by communication this order to the persons mentioned therein. 5. The office is directed to send back the records to the Trial Court Authorities immediately." 4. Aggrieved by the order passed by the KAT, the present writ petition is filed. 5. Though the petitioner has made allegations against the second respondent-Co-operative Society as well as the manner in which the case has been conducted by the first respondent and the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, he has not been able to substantiate the same. 6. The petitioner does not deny the fact that he had borrowed a loan of Rs.50,000/- from the second respondent - Co-operative Society. However, he has not produced any material to show that the second respondent - Society had charged an excessive or exorbitant rate of interest. He has also not produced any material to show that he has paid any money towards repayment of the said loan. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34698 WP No. 2361 of 2026 7. Under the said circumstances, the question of interfering with the well reasoned order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal does not arise. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1