- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302402026 NC: 2026:KHC:36702-DB MFA No. 3179 of 2026 C/W MFA No. 1640 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3179 OF 2026 (KPIDFA) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1640 OF 2026 (KPIDFA) IN MFA No. 3179/2026 BETWEEN: 1. KAMALAKSHMI VIVIDODESHA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD. KRISHNAPURA MUTT BUILDING, OPP. SANKSRIT COLLEGE, MARUTHI VEETHIKA ROAD, MOODANIDAMBOOR, UDUPI TQ. AND DIST. 576103 REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI B.V.LAKSHMI NARAYANA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 2. SRI B. V. LAKSHMI NARAYANA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, S/O LATE VENKAPPAYYA, R/A 'KAMALANETHRE', VIBHUDAPRIYA NAGAR, 05TH MAIN, 01ST CROSS, INDRALI, POST KUNJIBETTU, Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302402026 NC: 2026:KHC:36702-DB MFA No. 3179 of 2026 C/W MFA No. 1640 of 2026 UDUPI DIST. -576103 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NATARAJA BALLAL A., ADV.) AND: THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY FOR M/S KAMALAKSHI VIVIDODESHA SAHAKARA SANGHA, LTD., UDUPI, REP. BUT ITS COMPETENT AUTHORITY SMT. LAVANYA K. R. AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES UDUPI, RAJATHADRI 'A' BLOCK, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX, MANIPAL, UDUPI DIST.-576104 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VEERESH RACHAPPA BUDIHAL, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.16 OF THE KARNATAKA PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, 2004, AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 23.03.2026 PASSED IN MISC.NO.98/2026 ON THE FILE OF THE XCI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AND SPECIAL JUDGE FOR KPIDFE CASES, BENGALURU, SCCH- 92, ALLOWING THE PETITIONS FILED U/S.5(2) OF THE KPIDFE ACT. IN MFA NO. 1640/2026 BETWEEN: - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302402026 NC: 2026:KHC:36702-DB MFA No. 3179 of 2026 C/W MFA No. 1640 of 2026 1. KAMALAKSHI VIVIDODESHA SAHANKARA SANGHA LTD. KRISHNAPURA MUTT BUILDING, OPP. SANKRIT COLLEGE, MARUTHI VEETHIKA ROAD, MOODANIDAMBOOR, UDUPI TQ. AND DIST. 576103 REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT 2. SRI B. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, S/O LATE VENKAPPAYYA, R/A 'KAMALANETHRE', VIBHUDAPRIYA NAGAR, 05TH MAIN, 01ST CROSS, INDRALI, POST KUNJIBETTU, UDUPI DIST.-576103 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NATARAJA BALLAL A., ADVOCATE) AND: THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY M/S KAMALAKSHI VIVIDODESHA SAHAKARA SANGHA, LTD., UDUPI, REP. BUT ITS COMPETENT AUTHORITY SMT. LAVANYA K. R. AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES UDUPI, RAJATHADRI 'A' BLOCK, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX, MANIPAL, UDUPI DIST.-576104 ...RESPONDENT - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302402026 NC: 2026:KHC:36702-DB MFA No. 3179 of 2026 C/W MFA No. 1640 of 2026 (BY SRI. VEERESH RACHAPPA BUDIHAL.,ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.16 OF THE KARNATAKA PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, 2004, AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 21.1.2026 PASSED IN MISC.NO.1255/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE XCI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE AND SPECAIL JUDGE FOR KPIDFE CASES, BENGALURU (CCH-92) ALLOWING THE PETITIONS FILED U/S.5 SUB SECTION (2) OF THE KARNATAKA PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, 2004. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302402026 NC: 2026:KHC:36702-DB MFA No. 3179 of 2026 C/W MFA No. 1640 of 2026 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) MFA No.3179/2026 and 1640/2026 are preferred against the Orders dated 23.03.2026 and 21.01.2026 passed by the XCI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru (CCH-92) in Misc.No.98/2026 and 1255/2025, respectively under the provisions of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004 (for short "KPIDFE Act"). 2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. 3. The main ground raised in the appeals is that the appellants had specifically raised the question of maintainability of the petition before the XCI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and the same have not been considered. It is contended that under Section 10 of the KPIDFE Act, the learned Principal District and Session Judge, Udupi District, Udupi is the 'Special Court' who has territorial jurisdiction over the property attached and - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302402026 NC: 2026:KHC:36702-DB MFA No. 3179 of 2026 C/W MFA No. 1640 of 2026 therefore, the application under Section 5(2) of the KPIDFE Act ought to have been filed before the said Court and not before the Court in Bengaluru. Further, it is also stated that the application under Section 5(2) of the KPIDFE Act ought to have been presented within 30 days of the Notification under Section 3(2) of the KPIDFE Act or at least within the extended period of 15 days thereafter and that the application which is filed after the 618 days from the date of the Notification was bad in law. It is submitted that this aspect has also not been considered in its proper prospective. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent - Competent Authority, on the other hand, has filed a memo dated 02.07.2026 producing a copy of the Notification dated 10.06.2021 by which the Government of Karnataka, exercising powers conferred under Section 10(1) of the KPIDFE Act, with the concurrence of Hon'ble Chief Justice of the High Court of Karnataka has notified the XCI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302402026 NC: 2026:KHC:36702-DB MFA No. 3179 of 2026 C/W MFA No. 1640 of 2026 (CCH-92) as Special Court for trial of cases filed under KPIDFE Act. It is further submitted that all other questions have been considered by the Special Court in detail and that the question of applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 also stands covered in favour of the Competent Authority by the judgment in the case of Smt. Yashoda and others v. The Competent Authority and another passed in MFA No.380/2025 (KPIDFA) by order dated 20.01.2026, whereby this Court has held that even in spite of the provisions of Section 5(2) of the KPIDFE Act and the proviso thereto, the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act would apply to the Special Court under the KPIDFE Act. 5. Having considered the contentions advanced, we notice that the first contention as to the lack of jurisdiction in the Special Court is answered by the production of the Notification dated 10.06.2021. In view of the fact that XCI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru is designated as the Special Court under - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302402026 NC: 2026:KHC:36702-DB MFA No. 3179 of 2026 C/W MFA No. 1640 of 2026 Section 10(1) of the KPIDFE Act, the first contention raised by the appellants cannot succeed. Further, with regard to the condonation of delay as well, we notice that the delay has been condoned by the Special Court, after considering the contentions advanced by the Competent Authority. In view of the fact that Section 5 of the Limitation Act has to be held to be applicable to provisions before the Special Court as well, we are of the opinion that the said contentions raised also cannot survive. 6. No further sustainable grounds having been raised, the appeals fail and the same are accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RAK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2