Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 371 (KAR)

B T VENKATESH v. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF

WP/9129/2023 · 2026-03-23

E S Indiresh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16287 WP NO.9129 OF 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.9129 OF 2023 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: B.T. VENKATESH S/O THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O BURUGANAHALI POST, BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G.S. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES TUMAKURU SUB-DIVISION, TUMAKURU - 572 107. 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PRIMARY KRUSHI PATHINA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, BUGUDANAHALI, BELLAVI HOBLI TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 107. 3. SRI. B.T. SHIVAKUMAR EX-CHIEF EXECUTIVE, PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATHINA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, BUGUDANAHALLI, BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 107. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. M.S. RUDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R3-SERVED AND UNREPREENTED) Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16287 WP NO.9129 OF 2023 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE SALE NOTICE DATED 21ST FEBRUARY, 2023 ISSUED INSOFAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED VIDE ANNEXURE-A; 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 E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner is challenging the Sale Notice dated 21st February, 2023 (Annexure-A) issued by the respondent No.1 insofar as the petitioner is concerned. 2. Heard Sri. G.S. Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. H.K. Kenchegowda, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.1; and Sri. M.S. Rudraiah, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2. 3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, the same would indicate that the petitioner has not challenged the original award made against the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16287 WP NO.9129 OF 2023 petitioner. Therefore, I am of the view that, no interference be called for in this petition. Accordingly, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority by challenging the award, writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56