- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6049 WP No. 37421 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO.37421 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: SRI K.S. VASANTHAKUMAR S/O K SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, ANAGODU VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK - 577 566. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AMARTHYASEN M H, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. HIREMATHAD MAHESHIAH RUDRAYYA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, DAVANGERE DISTRICT - 577 001. 2. SRI. Y.B. NAGARAJ S/O LATE BALAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/AT VADDINAHALLI VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK - 577 556. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6049 WP No. 37421 of 2025 3. THE MANAGER PRATHAMIKA SAHAKARI KRUSHI & GRAMINA ABHIRUDDI BANK, DAVANAGERE - 577 002. 4. SRI. SATISH NAIK THE RETRUNING OFFICER PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI & GRAMINA ABIRUDDI BANK, DAVANGERE AND SALES OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO-OP SOCIETIES, VIDYANAGAR, DAVANGERE - 577 004. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYA M N FOR C/R2, SRI. YOGESH D NAIK, AGA FOR R1 AND 4, V/O/DTD 02.02.2026, NOTICE TO R3 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.11.2025 PASSED BY THE R-1 IN ELECTION MIS/CASE NO.DR/DVG/02/2025-26 PRODUCED AT ANNX-A CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE INTERIM APPLICATION OF THE R-2 FILED UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 OF CPC DTD 19.08.2025 BEFORE THE R-1 IN ELECTION MIS/CASE NO. DR/DVG/02/2025-26 PRODUCED AT ANX-E, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6049 WP No. 37421 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER The petitioner filed this petition challenging the order dated 25.11.2025 passed by respondent No.1 in Election Mis/Case No.DR/DVG/02/2025-26 vide Annexure-A, wherein the petitioner has filed the interim application under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of the CPC for rejection of the petition. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: 2.1. Elections of respondent No.3-Bank was held on 08.02.2025 and the petitioner was declared as a returned candidate. After completion of 45 days from the date of result, respondent No.2 had filed an election petition in Election Mis/Case No.DR/DVG/02/2025-25 before respondent No.1 challenging the election results. The petitioner filed an interim application under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of CPC for rejection of the petition on 04.07.2025. Respondent No.2 filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC for amendment of the election petition to insert the cause of action on 19.08.2025. Respondent No.1 passed the impugned order - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6049 WP No. 37421 of 2025 dated 25.11.2025. The petitioner, aggrieved by the impugned order, filed this petition. 3. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 and 4. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner filed an application under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of the CPC for rejection of petition and respondent No.2 filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC for amendment of the petition to insert a cause of action. Respondent No.1, without assigning any reasons, has passed the impugned order. Hence, on this ground, he prays to set aside the impugned order and to direct respondent No.1 to pass appropriate order by assigning the detailed reasons. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that, application for rejection of petition has been filed by the petitioner only with an intention to drag on the matter. Respondent No.1 has rightly rejected the application filed by the petitioner. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6049 WP No. 37421 of 2025 6. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 7. The undisputed facts are, the petitioner was elected as a Director; respondent No.2 challenging the results of the election declaring the petitioner as a Director, filed an election petition before respondent No.1. The petitioner filed an application under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of the CPC for rejection of petition; and respondent No.2 filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of theCPC to insert a cause of action. 8. From the perusal of the impugned order at Annexure-A, it is evident that, respondent No.1, without assigning any reasons, has passed the impugned order. Hence, on this ground alone itself, the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 9. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. The impugned order dated 25.11.2025 vide Annexure-A is quashed; - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6049 WP No. 37421 of 2025 iii. Respondent No.1 is directed to pass an appropriate order on the applications filed by the petitioner and respondent No.2 by assigning the detailed reasons, in accordance with law; iv. Pending application(s) in this petition, if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9