IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOEE DATED THIS THE 2" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2003,51 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUsTIcE K.L.MAN;DNATHf~i T WRIT PETITION NO.11433 OE 2dG9(GM+KSR)R°I_D BETWEEN 1 M. MALUR PREM KUMARa7« S/O LATE M R RANGARAJ', -- AGED ABOUT s8,TEARS;"*T" R/A FLAT NO.508r5Q9, _v ..u~, ALPINE REGENcY,NO-35; 10TH C MAIN ROAD IST BLOCK, JAIANAGARW_y"". *;' BANGALORE 11 ¥, G_} »f>;;, BETITIONER (By Sri:5R.SRIDSAR"EOR»MOIE¥.ASSOcIATES,ADV.) AND : , .... %.¥ "" 1A' E 1 THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES BANGALORE DISTRICT'g4, No.1, ALI ASEARQROAD' BANGALORE 56OD52,'SY ITS REGISTRAR "2_ ALRIEE REGENCY APARTMENT OWENRS WELFARE . ASSOOIATIOR, A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER A_'THEDKARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ".AcT,"ALBIEE"REGENcY NO 35, TOTE c MAIN ROAD, 1ST BLOCK . JATANAGAR, BANGALORE 11. RE? HEREIN BY *, PRESIDENT M.SRINIVASAN NARAIANAN RESQONDENTS .x.(B§--Sri: N.B.VISHWANATH, AGA FOR R1; z'SRI.EADHURANATH PADUKIS, ADV. FOR R2 ) e», THIS W.P.IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 225 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO,;"-*3 QUASI-I THE REGISTRATION OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT
VIDE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DT. 1g.,12,.V2f3f0.9=.
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER * u f _
PROVISIONS or THE KARNATAKA ‘SQCIVEITES .
REGISTRATION ACT, 1960 (AT
THIS PETITION COMING on :S’o1=¥;
HEARING THIS DAY, THE QOURT =
FOLLOWING :
According to .Apet{i;tnicner’, there is a
building known as situated
at 510,35 Jayanagar,
Bangalore, of nearly 100
residevintiali h of which, he is the
own of No.508 and 509. For
.–‘«.«_thev_”‘3pt;rpoVse Iofmaintenance of the Apartment
anVé1″..Eto_VV’~me,nage the common areas and other
therein, all the owrfers of flats
‘.Vhave”zf1ornzed an Association and a Deed of
I NBeclaration dt.17.2.2007 together with the
bjrie-laws were registered under the provisions
of the Karnataka Apartment Owners Association
52/
Rules framed thereunder are not applicable as
a Declaration is required to be registered hy
the owners of the flats under the p;§§ig1§¢s,f_
of the Karnataka Apartment Ogners:AssociationJ”
Act 72. Therefore, ithe”l:registrationQ’
Certificate granted as per Annexure%F by the
District Registrar is bad in lay.’
4. Whether vthe_ heed Yot”_Qeclaration
dt.17.2.2007 registered finder the provisions
of Karnataka Apartnent cease; Association Act
1972 and ‘ap”Welfar§:_?ssociation, registered
under “:the’ ProVisions_. of the Karnataka
Societies Registration Act 60, the purpose and
“uobject are one and the same or not has to be
ifiexaminedFhy the District Registrar and if he
is. of Athsr opinion that the registration
hgrantedKto the respondent No.2 is bad in law,
{it is for him to cancel the licence granted.
” Without approaching the 1″ respondent, it
‘i.would be inappropriate for the petitioner to
6/
seek such a relief as the 1″ respondent will
have the benefit of hearing the petition.e’r.i:”and_
the 2″” respondent to take steps
cancel the registration certificat;-‘–i V
in accordance with the Ka«rnatakaii’~.Societiesvi-i
Registration Act.
5. Therefore”. the.——ViV:A”WritLA .Pe’tviAtiL:§>n is
disposed of for the
petitioner resnondent and
if such by the 1″
responded:-:–z1tu,:”~ertihe, respondent shall take
actioriflin’ law after hearing
both the ” V
% Sd/-
nnnnn JUDGE