B Krishna Bhat S/O Lt B Narayan Bhat vs The Addl Registrar Of on 4 November, 2009

 "  _ GIP..INA__G;AR«, I3ANGAI;ORE--56o 085.

  (Dy. SrI.:t;}"uflNI¥5;GI3sII, SRCOUNSEL FOR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 

DATED THIS THE ow DAY OF NOVEM,uB'ER;'A--2:OO9 S SA A A I 

BEFORE,  S
THE HON'BLE MR. IUSTIcSI3}II,I\I. IS\IA.SGAT_TMAOII[AN'IIDAS
W.P.No;31269/20S:9(¢S~RESSI  

BETWEEN:
SRIBKRISHNA;      
AGED ABOU'T8Q_Y'FARS  ' ' ' A
3/0 LATE B;NAI1A,YAN"3IIAT'O_' .. "  ;
PRESIDVSNT.,(N0w''S:;ISPENDED) ' "  A  
vISH\IrABII.ARA_THVI HOUSE-BU1I.IDING
CO-OPEIRATIVE1SOf:I.1e<)Ni5r:N'rs" *  ,



Section 29(c) of the Karnataka Co--operative Societies On

contest the second res ondent assed an order on  as". 
P P .4 V  

Annexure--A1 disqualifying the petitioner ftom...fu'nc_tio1iii:g'as S

Director of a Co--operative Society for iagperiodiV_'of'three2.cye.gtrs...L

Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed ~a_nl"appeai§before the

first respondent in  appeal before the
first respondent the   for interim
order of    second respondent.
Underthe    respondent rejected the
prayerlof   of interim order of stay. Hence
this pe1:ition.' 

-  Till the secoridi respondent passed the order on 17.8.2009

the petitioner continuing as President of the Society in

queistionli Now by virtue of the order passed by the second

respondent as per Annexure--A1, learned Government Pleader

i  submits that a new Director by name Iayaram was co-opted and

he was in turn elected as President of the Society. On the other

.-/flkvw.../'\

"1L/



hand the petitioner disputes the fact of co--option of oneyliayarann

and he being elected as the president of Socie_t_f--_s,'..  

Without expressing any opinion with're~gard to the ¢c;--¢p:i;;n'o.f

one Iayaram as Director and eiectinghirn as PresidentVof'~~the.VV

society, the petitioner is entitled'i's»:fTo'r~ an  WII1t€I'il]1
order will enable the   Director only,
For      
 ....     

ll allowed.

4 ii) The impfigxiéailsrder dated 15.10.2009 passed by the
first as per Annexure–A is hereby
Z ‘ 7 __
H .” ::I’here will be an interim order of stay of the order
passed by the second respondent dated 17.8.2009 for

a period of four weeks.

at”

DKB

iv)

This order of stay will not disturb the of

one Iairam as Director and in turn as

President, it is already dor1″e.—-. ¢

Further the first resporiédezieis hereby directeds

dispose the appeal’ befotefi-im.’:’i§n E-APII3—
4/14/20094§As.(.}”‘:éNit1:iAin,V–tipléframe of four weeks
frozzczthe date i:ece’ip_t»_(_)f; “t.his order.

Sd/-I
JUDGE