- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 22225 OF 2023 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR. BIPIN KUMAR GUPTA S/O LATE DR.RAM NARESH GUPTA, AGED 52 YEARS, FLAT NO.A 705, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, HOSUR ROAD, SY NO.33/1 AND 33/2, BETERANA AGRAHARA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, BANGALORE-560 100 2. MRS. DEEPTI BAJPAI W/O ANAND TIWARI, AGED 38 YEARS, FLAT NO. E 1207, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, HOSUR ROAD SY NO.33/1 AND 33/2, BETERANA AGRAHARA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, BANGALORE-560 100 3. MR. ANAND TIWARI S/O J.P.TIWARI, AGED 43 YEARS, FLAT NO. D 402, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, HOSUR ROAD SY NO.33/1 AND 33/2, BETERANA AGRAHARA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, BANGALORE-560 100 Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 4. MRS. SHWETA KESHRI W/O BIPIN KUMAR GUPTA, AGED 46 YEARS, FLAT NO. E 603, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, HOSUR ROAD SY NO.33/1 AND 33/2, BETERANA AGRAHARA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, BANGALORE-560 100 5. MR. BASANT PRASAD KESRI S/O LATE BISHWANATH PRASAD KESRI, AGED 78 YEARS, FLAT NO. A 704, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, HOSUR ROAD SY NO.33/1 AND 33/2, BETERANA AGRAHARA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, BANGALORE-560 100 6. MRS. NEELAM KESHRI W/O BASANT PRASAD KESRI, AGED 68 YEARS, FLAT NO. B 704, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, HOSUR ROAD SY NO.33/1 AND 33/2, BETERANA AGRAHARA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, BANGALORE-560 100 7. MR.KRISHNA KUMAR SINGH S/O LT. SHYAM SUNDER SINGH, AGED 68 YEARS, FLAT NO. E 108. KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, NEAR B.M.W. SHOWROOM HOSUR SERVICE ROAD BANGALORE-560 100 8. MR.BISHRAM BASANT KESRI S/O BASANT PRASAD KESRI, AGED 37 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 FLAT NO. C 604, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, NEAR B.M.W. SHOWROOM HOSUR SERVICE ROAD BANGALORE-560 100 9. MR.ADITYA SACHAN S/O LALIT SACHAN, AGED 34 YEARS, FLAT NO. E 807, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, NEAR B.M.W. SHOWROOM HOSUR SERVICE ROAD BANGALORE-560 100 10. MR. JAY KUMAR S/O SATYA NARAYAN SINGH, AGED 36 YEARS, FLAT NO. E 605, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS, NEAR B.M.W. SHOWROOM HOSUR SERVICE ROAD BANGALORE-560 100 PETITIONER NO.3 TO 10 REP. BY THEIR POA HOLDER, I E PETITIONER NO.1 AND 2 &PETITIONERS (BY SMT. BEENA P.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, VIKASA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE REGISTRAR KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, SAHAKARA SOUDHA, MARGOSA ROAD, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560 003 3. KEERTHI ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, REGD. OFFICE AT C.V. RAMANNAGAR, MAIN ROAD, BEHIND BIG BAZAR, OLD MADRAS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 093 4. MR.S.CHNDRASEKAR S/O MR.T.S.SUBRAMANIAN AGED 45 YEARS FLAT NO.C-305, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 5. MR.SANJIB BISWAS S/O MR.SUBRATA BISWAS AGED 35 YEARS FLAT NO.C-903, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 6. MR.UDAY SHANKAR DAS S/O.MR.RANJIT RANJAN DAS AGED 37 YEARS FLAT NO.701, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 7. MR.JOSHY MATHEW S/O MR.M.S.MATHEW AGED 42 YEARS FLAT NO.D-107, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 8. MR.AMIT KUMAR JHA S/O KUSHESHWAR JHA AGED 40 YEARS FLAT NO.D-702, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 9. MRS.LIPSA MOHANTY W/O MR.SANDEEP PRITAM AGED 35 YEARS FLAT NO.306, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 10. MRS.KAVITHA NALLURI W/O MR.P.MADHUSUDAN RAO AGED 52 YEARS FLAT NO.A-205, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 11. MR.RAJAGOPALAN KUMAR S/O MR.JAAYARAMAN KUMAR AGED 45 YEARS FLAT NO.B-102, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 12. MR.ASHOK KUMAR PAI S/O.MR.PRAHLAD RAI AGED 43 YEARS FLAT NO.D-504, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 13. MR.V.J.THOMAS S/O.MR.V.T.JEROME AGED 47 YEARS FLAT NO.B-605, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 14. MS.SEEMA AGARWAL C/O SULABH AGARWAL AGED 46 YEARS FLAT NO.A-1003, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 15. MR.DEVANSHU KHETAN S/O MR.MURLI MOHAN KHETAN AGED 41 YEARS FLAT NO.C-403, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 16. MR.SUSHANT MUNDU S/O MR.SIBLAN PATRAS MUNDU AGED 36 YEARS FLAT NO.C-1102, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 17. MR.RAJESH CHOUDHARY S/O.MR.BHUBANESHWAR CHOUDHARY AGED 41 YEARS FLAT NO.C-305, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 18. MR.AJAY SONTAKA S/O MR.NAGORAO SONTAKE AGED 42 YEARS FLAT NO.E-1006, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 19. MR.SONADARSHAN N.G. S/O MR GANGADHARA AGED 25 YEARS FLAT NO.B-1202, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 20. MS.NISHA Y., D/O.MR.R.M.YADAV AGED 39 YEARS FLAT NO.B-1104, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 21. MR.SITARAMA SURESH MALLA S/O. MR.VARAHA RAMAA BHADRA AGED 52 YEARS FLAT NO.C-1003, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 22. MR.ABIRAMI PANDEY W/O MR.KANNAPPAN AGED 23 YEARS FLAT NO.A-701, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 23. MR.BRIJESH S NAGARKAR S/O.MR.N.V.SUBRAMANYA AGED 46 YEARS FLAT NO.B-1005, KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS HOSUR ROAD. S NO.33/1 & 33/2 BETWEEN AGRAHARA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU-560 100 &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MAHANTESH SHETTAR AGA FOR R1 & R2 SRI.SAMMITH S., ADVOCATE FOR R3 SMT.SUJATHA DURGEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R23) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2/ THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES NOT TO REGISTER A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY TO MAINTAIN AND MANAGE THE RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX KNOWN AS THE KEERTHI ROYAL PALMS AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: "Wherefore, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to : a) Issue a writ of prohibition directing the Respondent No.2/The Registrar of Cooperative Societies not to register a Cooperative Society to maintain and manage the residential apartment complex known as the Keerthi Royal Palms, also b) Issue a direction or order to the Respondent No.3/builder to enable the formation of an - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 Association under the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 as mentioned in the Conveyance Deeds. c) Grant such other reliefs that this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case, to the petitioners, in the interest of justice." 2. It is the case of the petitioners that petitioner Nos.1 and 10 are the apartment owners of the apartment unit known as "Keerthi Royal Palms". The builder/respondent No.3 has constructed the apartment consisting of 378 units based on the Joint Development Agreement and most of the apartment units have already been sold and are occupied by the unit owners. It is submitted that as per the sale deed executed in favour of the unit owners including the petitioners, the builder/respondent No.3 has undertaken to form an association under the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act,1972 (for short 'the Act,1972'). It is stated that as per the same, they have to form an association. The actions not only contravene the law, but also contrary to the clauses stipulated in the registered sale deed entered into between builder/respondent No.3 and the apartment owners including the petitioners. The petitioners after realising the above steps taken by some of the apartment - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 owners towards registering a co-operative society, sent an email dated 22.04.2023 and thereafter, a registered letter dated 14.05.2023 on behalf of the petitioners and finally another email dated 01.06.2023 to the builder/respondent No.3, expressing their grave concern regarding the formation of a co-operative society in their private property i.e. within the Keerthi Royal Palms Apartment Complex and requesting the builder to take measures to form an apartment association under the provisions of the Act, 1972. However, the petitioner did not receive any response from respondent No.3/builder. Thereafter, the petitioner has issued a legal notice dated 21.06.2023 in furtherance of the written communication dated 14.05.2023, reminding the builder/respondent No.3 to take prompt action towards forming an Apartment Owners association under the Act,1972 as promised in the registered sale deed and to stop any attempts towards registering a Co- operative society under the Kanataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act, 1959') or any other society under any other Act. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 3. It is stated that the builder/respondent No.3 replied to the legal notice through a reply notice dated 03.07.2023 by stating clearly that the builder/respondent No.3 has no objection towards assisting the apartment owners in formation of an association, but on the other hand, the builder/respondent No.3 issued an NOC in favour of formation of a Co-operative society to the few members. It is stated that the approval of respondent Nos.1 and 2, a few of the owners along with the builders have started collecting the funds towards forming a Co-operative society. It is stated that as per the final verdict of the High Court of Karnataka in CRP No.96/2021 C/w CRP No.64/2021 dated 08.09.2021, the High Court has held that if the apartment complex is used for residential purpose, an association under the Act,1972 should be formed and if it is for commercial purpose, a Co-operative society or a company can be formed for the management and maintenance of the complex. 4. It is further stated that the owners of the apartment units at the time of entering into Sale and Construction Agreement had agreed to become members of the Association - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 of Apartment Owners and duly complied with the provisions of the Act,1972. The petitioners have sent their written objections/letter dated 25.07.2023 to respondent No.2 requesting the Registrar of the Co-Operative Societies not to register the Co-Operative society. It is stated that if a co- operative society is imposed on the apartment owners at this stage with a minimum number of apartment owners and without the involvement of other apartment owners, it will cause mismanagement and commotion within the apartment complex. Hence, they are being aggrieved by respondent No.2's attempt to register a Co-operative society under the Act, 1959 contrary to the undertaking given in the deed of conveyance. Hence, the petitioners have filed the petition prohibiting respondent No.2 from registering any co-operative societies to maintain and manage the petitioners' apartment complex under the Act,1959. 5. The first query of this Court to the learned counsel for the petitioner is about the maintainability of the writ petition and filing a writ of prohibition on an anticipated action of the respondent/Registrar. It is submitted that on 15.11.2023, a Co- - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 ordinate Bench of this Court has passed an order restraining the Registrar from registering respondent No.3 without the leave of the Court and it is stated that it would not mean that maintenance would not be paid by the apartment owners of the apartment complex. This order has been extended from time to time. 6. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition and she has relied on few judgments of this Court. She relied on the judgment in the case of Mr. Rekha Kannan and others Vs. State of Karnataka and others arising out of W.P.No.27821/2024 (CS-RES) dated 02.05.2025. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent No.2/Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Society to consider the representation letter dated 06.09.2024 to quash the order of registration of respondent No.4 dated 19.10.2023 issued by the respondent No.2/Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies. In that case, the writ petition was allowed. The order registering the Society under the Karnataka Co-operative Society by respondent No.2-ARCS was set aside and - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 respondent No.5-builder was directed to comply with all the requirements under the law and form an Association of Apartment Owners under the KAO Act and the members of respondent No.4-Society to cooperate in forming an Association for the project known as "Ramky North". 7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that against this order, respondent No.4 td 23 therein have preferred an appeal i.e. Writ Appeal No.748/2025 and a Division Bench of this Court had stayed the said order. 8. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners has relied on another judgment in case of M/s Sobha Limited Vs. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies and others, arising our of W.P.No.5934/2024(CS-RES) dated 03.03.2026. The writ petition is filed seeking the relief to quash the order dated 07.02.2024 passed by respondent No.1 in appeal and cancelling registration granted by respondent Nos.2 to 3. In that case, petition was allowed. The order passed by respondent No.1 in Appeal No.30/2023-24 was quashed and the registration of cooperative society was cancelled. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 9. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has also relied on another judgment in the case of Proposed Starnest Apartment Owners Co-operative Society Ltd Vs. State of Karnataka and others, arising out of Writ Appeal No.564/2024(CS-RES) dated 18.06.2024. In this writ appeal, the division bench observed that the order of the learned single judge dated 23.02.2024, that the appellant cannot be registered as a co-operative society under the Act, 1972 as there are no commercial units in the project and the learned judge further directed the builder to co-operate with the members to form association under the Act,1972. The division bench considering the said order has confirmed the order passed by the learned Single Judge and held that where it is a residential complex, the society cannot be registered under the Co-operative Societies Act. 10. Learned Counsel appearing for petitioners also relied on another judgment passed in Mr. Arunkumar.R and other Vs. State of Karnataka and others, arising out of W.P.No.25528/2023 dated 23.02.2024. The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the registrar of co-operative - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 societies not to register a co-operative society to maintain and manage residential apartment complex known as DS-Max Star Nest. The coordinate bench of this court has observed that the petitioners are justified in raising the dispute contending that respondent society cannot have a Society registered under the Act of 1959 for the purpose of maintaining and managing the property in which the petitioners have purchased certain units. Under the circumstances, the third prayer is made praying for an appropriate direction against the third respondent/builder to co-operate with the petitioners in forming the association. Since the project does not involve commercial unit, the Registrar of co-operative societies could not have granted permission dated 18.10.2023. Respondent No.2 is prohibited from registering the proposed respondent No.4/society to manage and maintain the residential apartment complex. Direction is issued to the respondent No.3/builder to comply all the requirements under law and cooperate with the petitioners and members of respondent No.4 proposed society to form an association. The respondent No.3 shall cooperate and comply with the requirements of Section 5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 11. Learned Counsel has relied on judgment passed in Mrs. Saraswathi Prakash and others Vs. State of Karnataka and other, arising out of W.P.No.3779/2023 dated 28.02.2025. Where, writ petition is filed praying to restrain the respondents from registering the proposed Brigade Orchards Parkside Retirement Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., and the proposed Bye-laws before the jurisdictional registrar of co-operative societies. An order was passed considering the judgments in Shantarama Prabhu's case of a co-ordinate Bench and the Court has allowed the writ petition, restraining from registering the proposed respondent No.3/society and proposed bylaws to manage and maintain the 'Parkside Retirement Homes Brigade Orchards Apartment Complex' as the same does not involve a commercial unit. 12. Learned Counsel further relied on another judgment passed in VDB Celadon Apartment owners Association Vs. Mr. Praveen Prakash and others, arising out of Writ Appeal Nos.974/2019 and 1206 to 1211 of 2019(GM-KSR) dated 06.11.2019. The writ appeals are dismissed by affirming the order of learned single judge, that the impugned order as well - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 as order will not prevent the persons who are members of the appellant association from taking steps for formation and registration of an Association/Condominium under the provisions of the Act of 1972 inasmuch as the said sale deed executed in favour of the apartment owners contemplate formation of such Association. 13. Then learned Counsel relied on another order passed in case of Shantharam Prabhu and others Vs. K Dayanad Rai and others, arising out of CRP No.96/2021 and 64/2021(SC) decided on 08.09.2021, wherein the plaintiff has filed a CRP seeking to set aside the judgment and decree dated 04.04.2019 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM., Mangaluru and the same is allowed. 14. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that in the light of these judgments relied on by the petitioner and in the light of the settled law that, when the apartments are for the residential use, the Society cannot be registered under the Co-operative Societies Act. It is submitted that in the light of the judgments referred to supra, there shall - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 be a direction to the respondent to prohibit from registering the society. 15. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 23 submits that the submissions that are made before the Court both on the factual aspect and the legal aspect are not correct. It is submitted that they cannot prohibit the Registrar from registering the Society. It is stated that it is their fundamental right and there cannot be any writ of prohibition prohibiting an authority to do an act which is contemplated as per the provisions of the Act and learned counsel for the respondents has submitted more on factual aspects and this Court is not inclined to consider the same because this court is not convinced on the maintainability of this writ petition. 16. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. The writ petition is filed seeking a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from registering the respondent No.3/Society. The issue when a writ of prohibition lies is no more resintegra. Generally a writ of prohibition is issued preventing a Judicial/Quasi Judicial authority from exceeding their jurisdiction or prevents them - 20 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 from exceeding their jurisdiction or in violation of principles of natural justice. Here in this case the respondents have filed an application before the Registrar Co-operative Society seeking registration under the provisions of the Act. It is the case of the petitioner that the apartment is a residential apartment and it cannot be registered as a Co-operative society. Here the Registrar while registering the Society is not discharging any judicial or Quasi Judicial function. When an application is filed before the Registrar, he is statutorily bound to scrutinize the application, verify compliance and take a decision. The Registrar cannot be injuncted from examining an application which the statue obliges him to consider. Interference at this stage, amount to interfering with the statutory process. Hence, in the considered opinion of this Court registration being administrative in nature, a writ of prohibition is not maintainable to interdict the statutory authority from discharging the function. 17. When the application is before the registrar, considering the respective submissions of the parties, he will - 21 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 decide whether it can be registered as a Co-operative Society or not, there is a right of appeal against that or not. 18. When that is the framework provided under the Act,1959, just because judgments are rendered by this Court on a question of law as to when a co-operative society can be registered, it will not give right to the petitioners to come before the Court. It is the settled law that the parties have to exhaust the remedies available to them. In this case, the petitioners have relied on certain judgments, certain orders passed by a Co-ordinate Benches of this Court, where they have entertained the writ petition. In the considered opinion of this Court, in those judgments the maintainability of the writ petition was never argued and dealt with by the court. Hence, those judgments will not come to the rescue of the petitioner. 19. This writ petition is pending since 2023, where voluminous records are placed before this Court. If the petitioner appeared before the competent authority, by this time, the issue would have been decided in the light of the settled law. In the considered opinion of this court, this writ - 22 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14270 WP No. 22225 of 2023 petition is not maintainable before this Court. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to avail the appropriate alternative remedy. ii. Till the decision is taken by the respondents, the interim arrangement that is going on with regard to the maintenance of the apartment by the builder i.e. respondent No.3 shall continue. iii. All the contentions are left open to both the parties. iv. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE PKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39