{"id":106292,"date":"2008-09-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008"},"modified":"2016-01-21T11:16:12","modified_gmt":"2016-01-21T05:46:12","slug":"sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sri Bharathi Warehousing … vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative … on 17 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri Bharathi Warehousing … vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative … on 17 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: N.K.Patil<\/div>\n
IN THE HKEH C.\u00a33UR\"\u00a7' OF KARN ATAEQX AT BANGALQRE W}-\".?'~\u00a70' 10Si:3U2.\u20ac_'20S\n\nmm\u00bb mm THE 14\" an op smrmmnmx, zogssk';\n\n1\n\nSN 'FHE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nBEFQRE\n\nms HON'BLE MR. Jusracs N.K.PATH__. M    \n\nBETWEEN:\n\n'E\n\nSR: EHARATE-1tWARE+~\u00a7f3US\u00a3NG CDR'PQRAT%QN V\na.No.s-24-31, MANGALAGARI RQAD, ' '\n\nGUNTUR 522 CE\u00a311,{A,P) 1_  _  \nREPRESENTEO 3*: W8 PQ\u00e9\u00a3V\u00a7R 0? ATTGWEY \" - ._\nHOLQER SRENAGARAJ SAS--T%-Ti,;AGECjPaaO%.J_'T\u00bb  .\n39 YEARS, 3:0 AHOBALA 8AS!'P;\u00a5', F\u00a2.*.'A'\u00a5* \u00a3\u00a7.iQ.10\u20ac3_ ** \u00bb ., \" .\nBHUVANESNARE NAGAR3 sea C\\'\\',.R\u00a3'vMA\u00a3$\u00a3 N:=;<.sAR~.._'; .. \nW3 PGLESETTY .\u20ac;\u00a3'N3g%\ufb01;Si,\u00a3N\u00a73ARA\u00a7\\\ufb01.\u00ab1\n\n(PERM; 3  V .   _ \nGUNTUR,      '      H\u00bb\n\u00a72EPRESE\u00a3~\u00a3'2'EQ E.-BY Us PQwE\u00a7=:.':QF \ufb01fe.-'oRv:~4EY\nHQLDER. saw: AGAFEAJ S:*=~S'FRY;\u00a2AQ.E\u00a3I aaaur\n39 YEAR'$;"G.'.Qf ;\u00e9:=mB:2j;;:..;-*-\u00bb.. SASTRY: m";\u00b0+~:o.ws\nBHUV:xNES3NA%?%NA\u00a7\u00a3aR, 3:8 c:..Vv.RAmN NAG-EAR\n\n PETSTBNERS\n\n{By sag ;. BHARA"rF:;~;g:wcATE'._ \" \nms; Namaamw \u20ac3HAMEEZR$ ; -\n\n_:A\n2}'; A\n\nMf\ufb01 SHvREES'i\ufb01';\u00a7_';A CQ~QPERAT3VE\n\n'  V\u00a7N'DUsT\u00a7Z\u00a3\ufb01zL>'ES?Ai\u00a7~TE LTD\n\n._HF\\\\_{ENG ' \u00a7TSv.!?E\u20ac3!STERED QFFKIE AR,\n\nammsae, :<;.':s~:e\u00a7U\u00a7(E' \u00a3225? KAIRN-A\"\u00a7'AKA. A\"? BANG.-XLGRE xv_p.2\u00bbm_1as:s1;2s-as\n\nwnrr PETITION 159. 10861 or ;\n\n\n\nEN THE I-{KER \u20ac\"IOUE.T OF KARNATAKA. 21.'? BANC:\".9:LC3RE 's3\\s'.PhNo. iO8\u00bb6\u00a7.E?;QQ8\n' a\n\n4 W8 $HREESH'{\u00a7..A BLJELDERS (P) LTD\n\nREPRESENTEQ 8%' {TS DERECTOR,\nMESS, AMSHR GOPi\n\nN024 AT, \"SHREESHYLA'Z\n\n8?H MILE KANAKAPURA RQAD,\nEANGALQRE 62.\n\n Respomnj\u00e9wrs.    \n\n(By Sr\u00e9z ANAN? MANDGE, ADVOCATE FDR era:-3 \n\nI-\ufb01ti\n\nTHESWRQT PETFHQN as 1-mam UNERER m4r;cLEs 226 553.3 \"22:f'Q\u00a7='=,  '\nTHE co:~:a\"rm.mc2rs: as gmma PRAYtNG.'?G\u00ab._.SET-&;':?A\u00a3}E 1'1-aETvr:va:=2a,sV:.=s.NEo_.:\n\nQFEEEER, ET. 30.6.2808 VEQE ANNEXURE A PASSED 8'? THE X} AQQL-._ C\u00a7TY\nCEVLL JUBGE, 8ANGALC3RE %\u00a3\\\u00a3 Q33'-..NQ.40f2{}Q?'.j' '  T ' ' \n\nMs wan\" PETlT\u00a30N QQ?e%\u00a7?}\u00a3_G Q:4'\"F\u00a7'->{':\u00bb\u00e9E:>muNCE'z&AE\u00a7iT 0F\n030593: ms may THE sou RT ?..R_:;a--:\\tQL\u00a7Nc\u00a7._*:3 *rH_E\u00ab:_FQ:% gewame:\n\n  \n\nrepresentt\ufb01 by' Heldar. \u00a32\": this\n\npetitinrz, petitiim\u00e9ra VVIVF:;;\ufb01fe..v \"sc'>{jght for setting aside 'the\n\n:_.in1ppgn_\u00a7*3  datA5\u00e9dv3D\u00a7' June 2008 made on R.A.iV on\n\n\u00e9:\u00a7e\ufb01:\u00a2 \u00a2f _tf\u00a7'e\u00a7;L=na! City cm: Judge, Eangaiore m\n\n ta award the casts of this pet\u00e9tion\n\njvy-v+*3\u00a7}'d\u00bb.furth:e&  grant such other reiiefs, as this Court may\n\n da\u00a7\u00e9m'\u00a7%t is pass, in the circumstances of the case.\n\nE23?  Z%i\u00a23E~i COURT OF FLARNATAKA AT BANGALORE w.Me.1{:8\u00e91;2%es\n\n\n\nEN Tee HIGH C'f.}URT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOR.E er.e.z~e, I\ufb028\u00e9E1f1ZGQ8\n4\n\nrespondent through defendant No.1 and 3!! the<\/pre>\n
seventeen demand drafts have been en-caehed;”__eni}–‘.j”~..<\/p>\n
cred\ufb02ed to the Aeceunt ef respondent – defeno’ee{   H<\/p>\n
on 9″‘ December 2003 for a sum of , <\/p>\n
eubeequentiy, en instructions end o:1_:”beheEf.’..”.g{.<\/p>\n
respondent — defendant N94,  ef
\nde\ufb01ed 3″ January 2004 to 1 fine  of
\npetitioners that, despite   sum ef
\n   both de\ufb01ed
\n2″” January  respondent -~
\ndefendant  end execute the<\/p>\n
eeie deedejn fe”vn;_.::’ of’v~ti’\u00a7e_V’pfet’\u00bbL\u00a7t%ener No.1 – pieint\u00e9ff Nee.<\/p>\n
._vineteac\u00a7v-Q reepeeoe’nt”\u00a5 defendant No.1 went ahead,<\/p>\n
eneeotee efie!:’.vreg\u00e9etered a sham safe deed dated 303′<\/p>\n
:  “””V’Mey QGQS \u00a7ei*:%.1;A.\u00a7’~Vreependent – defendant No.4 viz. We<\/p>\n
o i.”fShfeeehyle’8Aoi!dere Pvt. Ltd. represented by ite Director,<\/p>\n
  ‘An’ieE\u00a7a Gopi, who is the daughter ef Reependent -\u00ab<\/p>\n
VT \ufb01gefenoant No.2. Therefore, petitioners here\u00e9n, in View<\/p>\n
tie TEE: Hiee came”? 0? KARNATAKA AT eeeeeeeen \\.w.1~e.:..2 eeemene<\/p>\n
IN Ti-{E HIGH COURT OF KARNATAELA AT BANGAI..OR.E WMPANO. 1(}8611’2{2{}8
\n51<\/span><\/p>\n
at the aforesaid reasons, were constrained te frie eg..___<\/p>\n
originai suit in (}.S.No.-40\/2007 before the Cpurt bei’e:fw:.f”rj’–.:”‘vv.<\/p>\n
and respondent – Defendant Ne_4 was efee erra\ufb01eidv   H<\/p>\n
Befendent Next in the suit En terms ef:v’J.Se”et%ee\u00ab._1$’  <\/p>\n
Speci\ufb01c Relief Act since the eaidbrreeperrdent -= aerenjam-e%   t<\/p>\n
was the subsequent purchaser  fut! scngereage or<\/p>\n
the two: agreements, bottj_”‘:\u00ab.detfie’c\u00a7\u00a7V.’.A2*\u00a7_’ra the jC_?::oLvrrt beiow. it ie the further rzeee of<\/p>\n
 that, the said prayers (in) and (c) sought<\/p>\n
  the Court betew wer enei\u00e9tatry ape, in any event,<\/p>\n
\u00a7*:’%  EEG}-E rjcrrggt er KAKNATAKA gr emeiieee w.r>.rre.trera:r2ese<\/p>\n
IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.NQ. 1G86\u00a7,\u00bb’?.{3Q8
\n\u00e9<\/p>\n
supar\ufb01uaus under Section 19 (b) of the Specific Re\ufb01ef
\nAct.\n<\/p>\n
3. Be that as it may, the Triai Court was p!ea5e\u00a7i..___<\/p>\n
‘to pass an e>c–parte interim order on 16″” January<\/p>\n
restraining the respondents – defendantsii frjg;%{   H<\/p>\n
transferring or in any way encumbermg :hesu:: s:c:%’–zt{:?:c}a:V\u00a7e;  ‘ <\/p>\n
praperty and restraining the defe{:da\u00a7$%$:”fr9m t}haf:\u00a7gihgi’3’\u00a7  ‘<\/p>\n
the naturex 9f the Suit Schec\u00a7\ufb01ief_V”‘ PrapV\u00e9:Tt\u00a7i_V. ‘:
\nrespondents – defendant  {\u00e9 t\u00a7f_.As\u00a7r\u00a7t::;:;\u00e9:’d% appegance<\/p>\n
after service of summcns.VV–a\ufb01e3VV fi\u00a3aAc\u00a7.L’ 3 \u00a7e\u00a3ai’:\u00e9d written<\/p>\n
statement.a_    ex\u00bb-parta interim<\/p>\n
order was hza\u00e9e at2sVc3\u20acVi;:t:=\u00a7:””‘b::,}”‘\u00a3’.!”ze Trim Court vide its<\/p>\n
grder d;a \u00a7:iet:i ,4″  Being aggrieved by the said<\/p>\n
 Triai Court making the interim cswder<\/p>\n
 ab$’.::1tA.Vi’Ea=_eV,’A  iAc:ndent — defendant Ne\/I \ufb02ed<\/p>\n
 4%3-VF.A. and respondents — defand-ants 2 ts<\/p>\n
 v4’4′;.j&%.rhVoLvJer\u00e9s initiaily arrayed as respcandents 3 ta 5 in the<\/p>\n
V’  “.._f?$’\u00a5.\u00e9s\u00a3A:V\u00a33iEa’f:eous Appeal wer deieted at the request :3?<\/p>\n
IN THE E”iii3H CCEURT \u00a33? KARNATAKA AT BAZ’\u00a7{}A},\u20ac3rRE W.P_N<3. E 8861:' 2{}{}E<\/p>\n
{N THE HEGH. ('3\u20acDURT {BF KARNATAKER 21."\u00a7"B\u00bbAEv5GA.LO?.E 'MRNQ. 3@8t3i:"2{'!{}\u00a7$
\n8<\/span><\/p>\n
4. it is the further case of petificmers that {ha<\/p>\n
respcndent ~ dafendant No.1 had nevar urgad the <\/p>\n
paint either in objections statemeent 1 written ssta;\u00ab*{am’\u00a2%*$fLj”‘  A<\/p>\n
f\ufb01ed befcare tha Yriai Cam”: or in \ufb01ne l\\’5A\u00a7${\u00a74&\u00a7\u00a73E:}:;\u00e9’t)EfL\u00a7$.–V:3′-7ig\u00e9t4.:f,  <\/p>\n
Appeai befere th\u00e9s Ceurt. After obt\ufb01\u00e9nif\u00e9gg ” th:\u00e97 <\/p>\n
expedit\u00e9en of the su\u00e9t fmm the’? *.\u20ac:\u00a7\u00a7x<.i$i9:3{ $anah_"v_;n:?f'* \u00a75\u00a7's <\/p>\n
Caurt hr': the Miscelianegmg Firs? : 1_j'.{\u00a7\u00a7'pga$  \u00e9:*\u00a7\ufb01* '\u00e9fter
\n\u00e9eading the evidence on  No.1…\n<\/p>\n
ptaintiff Na? and    {ha Triai
\nCourt; ‘the   “‘\u00a7\\\u00a30.1 has \ufb02ied
\nfrauduient  of mer\u00e9tss and
\nccmpieteiy v \u00a3.:;:ga.:1e ‘  out any materia\u00e9<\/p>\n
particuiafg ‘n:.fii%r\u00a7g”‘af_ a\u00a71y Eye %aw$ by raspondant Ne} w<\/p>\n
  \ufb02patit\u00e9aners \ufb01ie\u00e9 abjectisns to the said<\/p>\n
 \u00a7ntei*im”‘hagnb\u00e9i\u00e9\u00e9tiorg”praying fer rejectian cf the S.-ama<\/p>\n
 \u00e9lcgng  “\u20ac135 \u00e9vr\u00e9\ufb01en atatement accampanied with the<\/p>\n
 rmpcandent — dafendant Nam \ufb02ed a cam<\/p>\n
  b\u00a7<e Eaws czf respnndent No.1 aniy du\ufb01ng the<\/p>\n
 HREH {ICEURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANG.$:.\u00a7;.ORE W.P.No.\u00a7{)18\u00a33\u00a7\u00a32i'}\u20ac}B<\/p>\n
EN THE HEGH CQURT {BF KARNATAKA AT BA?:~lGAE.-ORE WRNQA l{)S\u00a2\u00a7\u00a3f'2\u20ac}\u00a7};\u00a7
\n19<\/span><\/p>\n
performance on the ground that in View af Senticn 13<\/p>\n
(b) ef the Specific Re\u00e9ief Act, “Q83 and the innumerajb\ufb01- b_V2v <\/p>\n
judgments Said down by the He:;n’b!e Supreme   ~<\/p>\n
wai! as ihe High Cuurta, prayeys (a)}:a~(c.}’anf;d;V  ‘V<\/p>\n
maintainabie and no netice undar 8e<:;\u00a7ii\u00a7r%'\u00abA.A_12v5 hf' : <\/p>\n
eperative Societies Aat were req.:,}ii<.ed ti) Vbe'VV%S$Uaeid"\u00a77a'<\/p>\n
instituta or mamtain the sigiuifar  gsrm by
\nthe Apex Caurt in the ca%;eE_   'SC
\nP"\u00a580'\u00a7. Pw\u00e9tiang\u00e9ra:  Court 3130
\non the ground.'   3139 failed ta
\nappreciate.;V th\u00e9t;'  -\u00bb~ pia\u00e9ntiffa, \u00a7':\n<\/p>\n
was conten d’e;d tha5t,’-.\u00e9t”L:Vi53ae;~\u00a7\u20ac’%\u00a7\u00e9;\u00e9\ufb01m\u00a3ng w%thr3Lrt gdmitting,<\/p>\n
Qniy pfggyers (bf)”‘a\u00a7j$?d ‘ (ti: attracted the pmvisions af<\/p>\n
 ‘hgnce the sa\u00e9d prayer may be struck aff<\/p>\n
 and :’::s;VJ’\u00a2\u00a3f: d3′?eb”; \u00e9?t\u00a7_or::.;;’\u00a7t$V1i’.’ prayers {b} and (C) wm\ufb01d make rm<\/p>\n
 d\u00e9fferer:;.’ie..t\u00a7AVth’\u00e9V suit. Having regard to this backgrmund,<\/p>\n
 vfp{\u00a7?;%tiA\u00a2?1Le–rs \ufb01erein feit nacessitated ta present the irzatant<\/p>\n
 _\u00a7;g}’\u00a7t petition saeidrag appramate re\u00e9iefs, being aggrieva\u00e9<\/p>\n
W T\u00a7’\u00a7’\u00a7 HEGH {7\u00a7f”}URT (Ii? 1~Z\u00a7’\u00bb..R1’k\u00a7A,”?A\u00a7{\ufb01. A? }\u00a7ANC\u00a7:’5k.L\u00a3.”}l%.E ‘W.}\u00a5’?’;’\u00bbJ0. \u00a7 i}E\u20ac\u00e9i\u00a7;’2%\u20ac)8<\/p>\n
I353 THE HEGH C\u20ac’DUR’F SF KARNATAKA AT BA\u00a7\u00a7{\u00a7A\u00a5.*-QRE WRNO. 1G8\u20ac51.;’2f,}\u20ac3\u00a7
\n31<\/span><\/p>\n
by the impugned order dated 30″‘ June 2008, having no___<\/p>\n
ether equa\ufb01y expadient and ef\ufb01cacious remedy. F:}r’tEf;e:25;’j’\u00ab–‘_:T”‘–.v_<\/p>\n
the Triai Court faiied ta appmdate that even praggg\u00e9rs    A<\/p>\n
and (:3) itseif do not fafi w\u00e9thin the scepa”uf–S$t-f\u00a7$r\u00a7.”\u00a7V:’\u00a7 .\u00a3V2:.f’ <\/p>\n
the Act and there is no materim an _3;i\u00a3\u00a71at\u00e9;:.vf\u00e9\u00a7:er’tc$ : ‘–~ <\/p>\n
awn prim.-3 fac\u00e9a hold that, resp\u00a7\ufb01’$\u00a7:wt — .v$e?*fe nd;a\u00a7\u00e9’:n\u00a7VA\u00bb\u00a7i\\.3@,4
\nE.e. the aubsequent purc:\u00a7aa.;\u00a7s,er_\u00ab” \u00a7\u00a7._:%e_mb\u00e9f’ \u00e9f’ the
\nrmpendent — Defendant   Qn the
\ncantrary, ail the mat\u00a7;*i\u00a7\u00e9’lV a\\;ai\u00a7a_&:;i\u00e9 ‘c>fi;*’\u00a7:V’r’\u00e9fc’c.ra\u00a5Aweu\u00a7d grima
\nfacie suggest  \ufb01gf\u00e9\ufb01gd\u00e9\ufb01t No.4 is us: a
\nmember _D.efagdant No.3 Saciaty.\n<\/p>\n
Further, it  ‘:b%4\u00a75\u00e9t%tioners that, the Trim<\/p>\n
Court haegfs’ failed \u00a7G”‘af\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7f&c\u00a7:3te that, when the \u00e9efendants<\/p>\n
.re:’\u00a7pa.%\u00a7;de_fjt:aa\u00a23’rnit that the business cf the Society is to<\/p>\n
 con$ir’L}Ct,’ d’ev%;i:)p;=Vt\u00e9stabEish and run an industriai eatate<\/p>\n
 sh\u00e9\u00e9a  lease out the buiidings and deveiaped<\/p>\n
  “members er seli them and (E) whan the<\/p>\n
p’i:a;’intf’ff i3 neither 3 member of the Saciety; (5!) m<\/p>\n
L<\/p>\n
EN THE HEGH CGURT (BF KA’R.NATA?;L\u00bb5. AT BANGALGREZ \u00a5%’_P.?a\u00a7 :2\u00bb. 3 386}.-*20{)S<\/p>\n
 KTHE HIGH COURT OF KARNA.’\u00a7AK25\\ 535? B\u00e9’~.?>3C3AI..if)RE W.P.F\u00e90. %\u20ac}86\u00a7f2\u20ac!Q8
\n.1 2<\/p>\n
industriai estate has been deveioped by the Society (iii)___<\/p>\n
the property agreed to be sold is net said for ocnstruct\u00a7rg37f'<\u00ab.b.V:<\/p>\n
an \u00e9ndustriai shed; and (iv) there is nc materiai an–.4 r:ec;uf a'=-'" 3<\/p>\n
tr.) even prima facie $9 Show thaitfth-e s:.\u00a7=_;1b$:.=,ji(.\\',i.s.:.s.~r'a:tv–f'.~ <\/p>\n
purchaser is a member. Therefore,\u00bbA:'%h\u00e9';\u00a7{1it z\u00a7{c;_;A:.\u00a7d..rr~c)*t\u20ac '–~ <\/p>\n
ham been dismissed fer nan \u00e9ssuaa}*:ce af'*n_\u00a2tica\u00e9= ufgd\u00e9t<\/p>\n
Secticm 125 0f the Co~ope};"a':ivee" \u00e9\u00a7i.%\u00a7\u00a7;\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7;._AAct.A 'vv'Ha"\u00a7:ing
\nregard to the facts and case, as
\nstated abeve,   ":\u20aca;*;essitated ta
\n\ufb01rasent the     " V' A<\/p>\n
5. Tif\u00e9e  canvassed by learned<\/p>\n
counsel agagj\u00e9z-tLrgingv’ft:r:  is that, the Empugrsed<\/p>\n
pfder i$._iC\u00a2ieeriy V\u00a50\u00a3.\u00e9\u00a7y& ‘:and in tote! c\ufb01sregard ef the<\/p>\n
.\u00e9~;tat*;.:i:\u00a2;:=3:;p:i:;a\u00a7r\u00a7s;i.VA\u00a7\u00a7r;v e\u00a3 Grder 7 we 11 of same of Civil<\/p>\n
 vPra{\u00a7e\u00a7\ufb02’:r’e.vv.V  u\u00a3if[j–3_%$I=\u00a7pp3rent on the face caf the order<\/p>\n
\u00a7g1ig;ugn\u00e9’d..t\u00a71atL\u00a3he Trial Court has faiied to apprec\u00e9ate<\/p>\n
  .VVTL’}::s.~ti\ufb01oner$ are neat liable ta issue natice under<\/p>\n
  ‘\u00a325 sf the Karnataka Comaperative Societies<\/p>\n
EN THE H16}-I CQURT G?’ }<Z.;'&P;2'\u00a7.=<kTAKA AT BA1*2EGALf}RE WRNQ. I %gi:"3&[}8<\/p>\n
ZN THE tttett. <::::z.;R:r {DE KAR?\\\u00a7A'i"AK;A A'? BANGALORE w..m.~m \u00a7Q$61.f2{3i)8
\n13<\/span><\/p>\n
Act when 331 the regards, plaint and averments ciearty<\/p>\n
evidence that, the subject mattpr of the suit does not<\/p>\n
touch upon the cpnstitutipn, management 0!’ buginess at<\/p>\n
tha Society. The Trial Caurt aiso fa\ufb02ed tp apprec\u00e9atp-._.\u00bb_V’~..pp’<\/p>\n
that, the avetments made in LA. fi\ufb01ed under  <\/p>\n
Rate 11 (5) CPO fired by first resportdent We  At<\/p>\n
urged either in the otgect\u00e9on or in  <\/p>\n
filed in the Trip! Court 01′ in th\u00e9:”‘~!&&isp\u00e9tta_r:e.c3\u00a7;:sVVA”‘t\u00e9ir\u00e9tS<\/p>\n
Appeal before this Court.  artv\u00e9rd\u00e9vr pf
\nexpedition of the suit from    evidence<\/p>\n
haa b98\ufb01:V:i\u20acd.’DhAvV$Qh3_tf’Q\ufb01\u00a77g\u00e9\u00bb.pgti\ufb01\ufb02R8l’ No.1, and issues<\/p>\n
are framed tt=VveV’Tr\u00a7’4;aV\u00a3:  at that stage, the first<\/p>\n
v4_resppnd\u00e9;’rttt’~has ti’ipr\u00a3__ _____ _jf:’auduient interim appticatipn<\/p>\n
A\u00a7rt*txctlVA\u00a3.ji”t)eArve-,ft~ptrirnertts and cpmpieetety vague, without<\/p>\n
   settittgt “out ajrt\u00e9teriat particuiars or the bye taws of the<\/p>\n
. ..V\u00a7_”_;.,_\ufb01sppndenttNpft — Society. Further, it is submitted that,<\/p>\n
   Court has failed tn appreciate that, the sum<\/p>\n
 “\u00ab–;%irt_gi’s\u00e9zubstance at the case ma cut by first respondent<\/p>\n
_____#M__”___,,_….—or-1<\/p>\n
B? THE HIGH CGURT C}? KARNEYTAKA AT BA1*\u00e9G\u00a3sLC)RE W.P.}~\u00a7::s.\u00a3 G\ufb01ftif\ufb01\ufb01\u00e9i\u00e9i<\/p>\n
IN THE HIGH CQURT OF KARNATAKIA AT BANGALORE W.?.2’~$”o. 1086132098\n<\/p>\n
4.<\/p>\n
is that, the relief sought for by petitioners was not oniy to—.._b<\/p>\n
enferce the performance of the ccntract but <\/p>\n
reiief ‘cf declaration of the saie deed dated <\/p>\n
ms and the Recti\ufb01cation deed  j;\n<\/p>\n
2065 executed by the first respogdgnt f\u00e9veur    <\/p>\n
respondent, the subsequent ;:>urc:f\u00a7\u00e9…’-‘.4_V1\u00a2’=.r as V\ufb01’u\u20ac3″_u:a;’:v\u00a7d ;\u00a7{‘\u00a7Qid
\nand hence, prayers (\u00a33)  VA  upon the
\nconsiitution, business; andi.nziriagv\u00e9rxfarifofi\ufb01\u00e9. Society.<\/p>\n
The Triai Cour: ?\u00a7urt\u00a7\u00a7\u00e9_:j ac\ufb01mmi\ufb01eg  ‘gr}:’ai.’\u00ab”‘:.V=’.-.~ ermr in as<\/p>\n
much as it hag  the Engtant suit<\/p>\n
admittedly Viz;-3 one\u00bb fdfv\u00a23p\u00a7:t:\u00a7\ufb01t:-[.\u00a7\u00e9.\u00bbrf’n?mance and in View of<\/p>\n
section 19 (b’;%g%   Reiiefa Act, 1933, and<\/p>\n
vinnggmer;-\u00a7.>i e__iAV’ \u00a7L;dg:;r\u00a7e*nts….\u00ab&a\u00e9d dawn by the Hcxfbie<\/p>\n
S up\u00a7\u00e9a\u00e9\u00a7e~  316%! as the High Ceurt, prayers (a)<\/p>\n
 (c) a_r_\ufb01  ma\u00e9ntainable and na notice under<\/p>\n
. :v\u00a75\u00a7’c?;ion 125,V:(\u00a7?” the Karnataka Co—c>pe:’ative Samieties Act<\/p>\n
 \u00ab.V.V’wa\u00e9 :jeq_u\u00a7’r’ed ta be issued is institute er maintain the wit<\/p>\n
‘V:.Vf::’%}\u00a3,hQ3se prayers.\n<\/p>\n
YN TEE BEGH CCRERT OF KARM”.TA}z.A A’? BA.1’xE{3AL{}}1:’\u00a3 %.w>.2~;?g.1 a3zs1_.-r’2\u00a3:u:>$<\/p>\n
 THE Iv{1\u20ac1}~H COURT OF \u00a7{.\u00a7-‘\u00ab.RNATAKi13\u00a7 A’? E’:ANGA{.(3F’.E W.P.N0. 1(}Si5\u00a7f’200$<\/p>\n
6. Farmer, warned counsei appearing <\/p>\n
pe\ufb01t\u00e9oners submitted that, the Trial Court if <\/p>\n
committed a grave errar, resulting in sbehrinus n’1is7e’c\u00a7””f:$erfcrmance $3′ the contract
\n   V\u00a5’sV*:’cv:v’\u00a3i;$:’?irA\u00e9c:t) teucrhas gm acts of<\/p>\n
m}an\u00e9ge\ufb01\u00a7e.:?1f’3…_3nd-business ef the Soc\u00e9ety, has opinad<\/p>\n
 ” “\u00a3.hat, it”\u00ab\u00ab..wa.:\u00a7’i-n\u00e9umbent upon the petitieners to issue<\/p>\n
 Vrid\ufb01ce under Section 125 of the Karnataka<\/p>\n
 tCg)\u00a7c-L\u00e9\u00e9r\ufb01tive Sacieties Act at paragraph 2? page 19 of<\/p>\n
 \u00abj  ‘\ufb011:9f’V5fhpugned or\ufb01er dated 39″‘ June 2008. Accordingiy,<\/p>\n
W THE HIGH COURT’ OF KARNATAKEK A’? BA1’\u00bb\u00a7G.Ai.C}RE ‘\\F\\F.23’.?&Ee;.i{)8\u00e9\u00a7f2{“\u00e9G8<\/p>\n
IN THE HEGR CQURT {Z}? K2′-\\RNATAK.A AT BAN'{frALi3RE W,?.1’~\u00a7:0\u00b0 198133 t:’2(}f.}8
\nE6<\/p>\n
the Trial Court, despite the binding ctecieien ef the Apex<\/p>\n
Court: reperted in MR 2094 SC 1801, has whetiy<\/p>\n
rejected the pteint ineteed of rejecting the retevent””‘\u00bbt.<\/p>\n
pertien of the prayer, which the Tria! Court deen_2e’*\u00ab\u00ab’ee.’__j: <\/p>\n
teaching the conetttutien, management and bt;ein:fe:ee”*ef <\/p>\n
the Society,<\/p>\n
?. Further, he vehereentiy”et2hzrnitted’ttaet, t!\u00a7evV.i._:TrieI <\/p>\n
Ceurt bee faited notice that? preyere{b}”e’nd..(e}.i\u00e9teetti do
\nnot feii within the  the Ca\u00bb<\/p>\n
operative Seetetiee.  ee:’Aa;se;”ft: freret”e_n ereteubmiesion<\/p>\n
during theivicoureeef.:jepiyg:e~;<1d there is no meteriet on<\/p>\n
reeord wheteeever'-.Ate.'A'  tecie hold that, the<\/p>\n
{eepondeet No.4 ",'  the subsequent purchaser is e<\/p>\n
  the :\ufb01:'et respondent –\u00bb Society, but, on the<\/p>\n
 V ceetrethy,'tttekfeefteftet eveiiebie on teeerd weutd prime<\/p>\n
'r..__fe<:_ie ettev\u00e9vtthet, the fourth rwpendent is not e member<\/p>\n
4~V.t"'_g:;*SItftttVe'ttt\u00a7zjst respondent – Seeiety in as; much es in the<\/p>\n
  eeie deed dated 30*?' y 2005 as wet! as the<\/p>\n
 Tti\ufb01 HEGH {5C}'UR'? (BF KARNATAKA AT BA'i'~Ei"3ALGRE t'~N.P.1\\'1e.}\u20ac)E\u00a7z3}f'2GCs2<\/p>\n
{N TEE HIGH \u20acIf.OURT OF K21.RNAT.AKA. AT BANGALORE W.?.N0. 1\ufb02861f2.(}G8
\n1?\n<\/p>\n
rec\ufb01fica\ufb01on deed dated 2″‘ September 2005, both dc:<\/p>\n
not disclase that the fourth respcmdent who <\/p>\n
subsequent purchaser is a member of if <\/p>\n
respcndent ~ Society. The Trig!  a:s;’e”f\u00e9\u00a7iI1\u00a2\u00a7”v?\u00a7g_% u  <\/p>\n
apprmiate that, even otherwise the  *6.’<\/p>\n
reiied upon by first respcandent -gnfy faife  5?’<\/p>\n
the first respendent anyyghereAg.V-~~.’:;\u00a3}\u00a7,\u00ab. “c”:r_:_\u00a3 t\ufb01\u00e9’ ‘eontgiary.
\nfurther the case cf pet\u00a7tio:;a e’::s;;.’     Tri3E Ceurt
\ncamm\ufb01tad an err’\u00a7,ar~Ai:;:f:V’V:-ncat  at’
\nthe Hon’bEe -as High Court,
\nre\u00a3ie;~ci h’sr’e’fdf\u00e9g: he submitted that,
\nthe arder  \u00a7r.*\u00ab2;:T>:,2ghet#’V} _.:.i’?.2.A\u00a5fjV’V:\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7\u20ac.:A:\u00a7i\u00a7\u00aetainabie and \ufb01ance, the<\/p>\n
sarne is :3iab1\u00a3e :9 be s\u00e9i a\u00e9;-\u00e9d\u00e9tat the tnreshezd itseif.<\/p>\n
    F’L{fthver,._ it isW{t\u00a7A\u00e9 contentitm af Det\u00e9tioners that<\/p>\n
thu\u00e9   by the petiticners before the Trig}<\/p>\n
Court iiiem\u00ab.. mt’\u00b0considered properly, whereas, the cases<\/p>\n
 :b.y_ i\u00e9\u00e9rned counse;-5 for respondents have been<\/p>\n
 _ 9.\u00a2:sn;\u00a7*id e%\u00a7\u00e9d by the Trim Court and proceaded to {eject the<\/p>\n
L<\/p>\n
EN THE HIGH CQLERT 0? KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE V\\7.P.}\u00a7o.1G\u00ae\u00e9lf2008<\/p>\n
{N THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE W.P.N<}' 19861!-'2(}08
\n\u00a38<\/p>\n
plain': in wheie. To substantiate the said eubmise\u00e9en, he<\/p>\n
pieced reliance en severe! judgreenm of this Court end<\/p>\n
the Apex Court reperted in 1961 (1) Mys-.L.J.397 — Heerfe.<\/p>\n
nete 1, para 1 @ Pg.39?; 1971 Mys.L.J. Pages\ufb01"'*'r?:.tJ?3._: V'\u00ab' <\/p>\n
Short Note 392; 1_L_e.1973 vas.xx;r: Myef2*3*.':i;'::'~Ev.:{;;~\u00a7_..A T T<\/p>\n
1973 Vel.XX1!1 Kar.1098; 1939 (3):;KezA'A.!;,\u00a7J:A5E)9;':"'!498Ce..'__V <\/p>\n
(supp.)SCC 437; MR 1997 SC'V\u00a7?.-2O?V7'vHVead 99999):<\/p>\n
A.i.R. 1999 so page 19? Hea9 9r9eeera);%r99.9.1982
\n3.0. page. 92; MR. 19s99_c,r9e13:99.9. 1971 (1)<\/p>\n
sec 9.399; A-I.R 92999 ssfe. 9999999u99rr9ed that, in<\/p>\n
View of the 'sreezr Eejv\ufb02aid  by the Apex Ceurt<\/p>\n
in the aforeseid' ;L9g99n:9;%r;r;9 herd and deciared 9:99,<\/p>\n
whenevfer jzherrertiee h'9ve get conetitutiena! right 99<\/p>\n
 Artie'ieAA22? of the Censtitut\u00e9on sf indie,<\/p>\n
the .C2{:r;.:rt"_gsSjtvV*\u00a7}ast pewer under the said provision to<\/p>\n
enterfe\u00e9n arid 'Enterfere in perverse orders, which are<\/p>\n
.  "V9.r:fenre.eus'"and i\ufb02egel, on the face 93' it, resulting in<\/p>\n
 –..\u00e9geri*pL:9 {miscarriage cf juetic%Mln the instant case, the<\/p>\n
” ” ” 99 THE 99:39 COURT OF KARNVATAKA .9? BA?>5GALORE w.m~m.:999:s2999<\/p>\n
IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE W.\u00a5’.Ne. !f}86i;”2\u00a7Q8
\n19<\/span><\/p>\n
Triei Ceurt hae traveiied beyond the eeepe and ambit of<\/p>\n
the statutory previeione end without understanding the<\/p>\n
meaning and purpose fer which the iitigentew <\/p>\n
redressing their grievances by invoking the   it<\/p>\n
provisions cf the Act end Ruies. Furj:her’,”thg”..f{rie*-if\ufb01eigrt*7′ <\/p>\n
has overlooked the baeic distinction tietsrileen   it<\/p>\n
dieeioeing the cause of action  retief
\nfor the reason that, the reiiii-;~f’:eeu__:giht  eerxetitute
\nthe cause of ection,__bL:t, en  c%.weireryv,._’trieyeenetitute<\/p>\n
pieading ef feetslir \u00a7ri”i’ew ie not the<\/p>\n
pieeemeei””reeAti.ie_gAV’:::3:-ef tint in its entirety.
\nWhether \u00abgranted or: the pieeded<\/p>\n
facts en}:.\u00a3..ti’)e eiwicienee  ie toteliy different from<\/p>\n
 :’e\u00a5i’ef armies.  reiiefe cieimed may net be<\/p>\n
on the eieedinge and the evidence<\/p>\n
 adduced.  part of the reiief cermet be greeted ‘<\/p>\n
4i44i\u00a7:3\u00a5.E\ufb01”:\u20ac:e__C\u00a7\\uiiE” “Court is a different matter from saying that,<\/p>\n
 heeeeee at a combined cieiyzel reiiefe the juriedictien is<\/p>\n
EN “VHE HEGH C.C}’UF_T OF KARNATAKA AT BAEQGALORE W’.?.”i’~=1′<:a.i {}86E,~'2\u20aciG3<\/p>\n
{N THE HIGH COEERT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE \\\u00a7'.P.N0. 1986 1.52088 '<\/p>\n
C26<\/p>\n
eueted or no cause of action is diecioeed. Ceneidering<\/p>\n
the retiefs maimed vie\u00bba\u00ab-xIis the pteedtnge weutd not<\/p>\n
mean cornpertmenteiizetien or segregetien. This eepeetjf-_'<\/p>\n
ef the matter has been epeci\ufb01celty urged and   <\/p>\n
before the Trial Court piecing reiieneehn  <\/p>\n
ef the Apex Court in the case of Soea.e::S;}t<hdev;%:.ASe\u00a3:I\u00e9<\/p>\n
Vs. Assistant Charity Cemmissioktef "end vethers T  3<\/p>\n
in Am 2994 so 1301. V:"Eurttte'tV,iti__g~}ee_ smct\ufb01cassy
\npointed out that, when 't\u00e9ee.'.'–~net taken<\/p>\n
any stand in his;  :=5tetee*%\u00e9\u00e9nt_"at1\ufb02"bejections to the<\/p>\n
t\ufb01teftm 3 –:;Vt\u00a7jer_e_–"vVV\u00a7?\u00e9as no mandatery<\/p>\n
requirement" fert%iss:1th\u00a7A'~etatiutd'ry netice under Section<\/p>\n
_125 of Vtijte l\u00e9ereeteke V:(3o;epferetive Societies Act, having<\/p>\n
:"'re\u00a7ar;ct_:xtc  eeegae and nature at re\u00e9ief seught for in the<\/p>\n
 _ suit. A\\':"\\IVhie\u00a7'}:'tt:\u00bb;et'AV~is"t:phe!d, on the face at the erder, this<\/p>\n
 ieurt tt\u00e9ae \u00a7et'V\u00a7ide pcswer to entertain the instant petttion<\/p>\n
' ;',i:i1fe:\u00a7A\u00e9vrti3a.r\u00a5:icv;V!'e 227 of the Ceestitutien of indie. 2'-"urther,<\/p>\n
  gugr\ufb01med that, as heid bg\ufb01\/'e)Apex Court in the case<\/p>\n
'____w___,,,,_._.\u00bb\u00bb——–7<\/p>\n
 '\u00a77H;E EZKEH CQHMMERT C}? Kr'1RN\u00a7%JFfKKA AT BA2\\EGA\u00a7_,\u00a3"}RE '\\V.\u00a7'.N<:\u00bbt i\ufb01\u00e9iil\ufb02\ufb01\ufb02<\/p>\n
:19 THE HEGH CQURT 02? KARNAYAKA AT B.ANG~ALORE w.P;No. sasmzzoog
\n22<\/span><\/p>\n
cf State sf West Bengaf reported in 1971 at SOC \u00a33,309 <\/p>\n
normaily, before a petitian under Article 226 <\/p>\n
entertained, there should be recourse ts   ~<\/p>\n
authorities which have power to give rir;-s\ufb01\u00e9f;~\u00ab      V<\/p>\n
rute of practice and not 0? jurisdiction. >A:’TH7e{\u00e9for\u00e9;v_\u00ab%\u00e9A’High<\/p>\n
Court is campetent ta {entertain \u00e9n~ i\u00a7etitiev\u00a51,’*\u00ab \u00a3\u00a7_ve:i’.= 3<\/p>\n
the aggrieved party has  ‘:*T\u00e9V:*ne’&\u00a7es
\navailabie under the__  *\u00a3:\u00a7\u00a7 \u00a2\u00a7’vAA–‘g\u00a7%partm&nta\u00a5
\nauthorities.  ‘__,he::’– ‘re?'{_i\u00e9.\u00a3\u20ac\u00a7  ”   judgment 9?\n<\/p>\n
the Apex    Baidya Vs.
\nPrafu\ufb02ya  H:’re;3a:’tec! in 1997 SC<\/p>\n
53.2677 and ‘dr\u00e9w   ‘\u00a30 paragraph 10 3f the<\/p>\n
 said  which frva_a_d$s thus:\n<\/p>\n
   power sf superintendence af<\/p>\n
 _ the H\u00e9kgh  <:,o"urt under Artiste 227 cf the
\nCnns\ufb01tut\u00e9\u00e9\ufb01sn is not confined in administrative<\/p>\n
 AA Vsu\ufb01eri\ufb01tendence only but such power inciudez.-3
\n u  its sweep the pawer of judiciai review.\n<\/p>\n
 The power and duty W High Court under<\/p>\n
~…………._..–\u00bb—-\u00bb—-‘”””””\n<\/p>\n
EN TEE aiE:3H Cetgm” {>12 EARN ATAKA AT BANGALOR’rZ W.?.}\u00a7o.1\ufb0186}f20%8<\/p>\n
3% THE HIGH Ci3U’R’\u00a7” QF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.1\\i0. i{38fi1f2Q\u20ac38
\n22<\/span><\/p>\n
Article 227 is \ufb01eentially to ensure that the
\nCourts end Tribunals, inferior to High Ceurt,<\/p>\n
have done what they were required to  <\/p>\n
Law is well settled by verieue decision of tfiie  Z<\/p>\n
Gem: that the High Geurt can iriterfere ~’;;nd.ei*’i
\nArticle 227 ef the Conetitu\ufb01’ori’:.&ini\ufb01zeieee. sf .
\nerreneeue eeeumptioe or i ‘ eating’ 2 beiyendei   V . _
\njurisdiction, refusal to exe%ciee _juriediijji:idn,
\nerrer ef lew ep{37e;ent\u00ab”l’meri–:’j__ reegxrd {age
\ndieting uiehed from ea’ ie?ere- .   V.  law,
\nerbitrery or ceprieioeeiiiexeieieeifef  or
\ndiecretien,’_e.\/ivpei\ufb01eet eifrei  erriving
\ne findingiwhii\u00e9iiie”\u00a73i\u00a7fi}eree”‘lerv’V:beeed on ne
\nmete_:*iei,iV Cr. injuetiee. As
\nregards \ufb01edirig ‘ef:efectv_.Vef:flr}.e inferior Court, the
\nHigh CeergeheV\u00a3:ldV’rjc\u00a7’\u00a3.:\ufb01L:eeh the judgment of
\ntljeiieueherdirize-teiicegirt rnemly en the ground
\n  ffiriding ef  was erroneous but it will<\/p>\n
‘ee High Court in exerciee of due
\n Article 22? to interfere with the
\n\ufb01nudingiefviect if the suberdinete Court came is<\/p>\n
‘V “t\u00a7”‘.’&n cehclueion without any evidence er upon<\/p>\n
ii “‘._Vf\u00a5”:\u00a3:’rl’iifeSt misreading ef the evidence thereby<\/p>\n
1N TEE Hi.<3iri seem: ee Keeeeiiiee 52;? BANGALORE wlpml x ee\u00e9iizaee<\/p>\n
EN THE HEGH <f$QUR"\u00a7' QF KARNATAKZA AT BANGALORE W.P.N0. i{}%$\u00a7\u20ac3if2\u20ac)\ufb01$
\n23<\/span><\/p>\n
indulging in improper exercise sf jurisdiction or<\/p>\n
if its conclusiens are perverse?\n<\/p>\n
9. Further he subm\u00e9tted that, as heid En   is A<\/p>\n
same judgment, if the evidences on retiurd ‘iri._re;:–:.pTec’_t cizfil <\/p>\n
3 quwt\ufb01on of fact is net at an takeha”Erin_A\u00a7\u00a2on\u00a7\u00a7i;i:\u00e9ra?:’a?\ufb01 V <\/p>\n
and withmzt referame ta such e7’s;aLi.q:tV\u00a7\u00a7,=nce; Bf<\/p>\n
fact is arrived at by infgefigr C’io ;u;f\u00a7::’i.g;f\u00a7;”‘vvL’Tribur\u00a3\u00e9E, \u00e9uch
\n\ufb01nding must be heidjx: be  in factual
\nbasis. in sucfj   0}’ the
\njurisdicticn   Caurt wilt be
\ncompeten\u00e9 to!  ‘V$g\u00a7.:.\u00a7”‘-lvvpgraerse \ufb01nding csf fact.<\/p>\n
Tharefcre, be View 91’ the wen set\ufb01ed<\/p>\n
.\u00a7fincip\u00a3,e\u00a7 bf.\u00a7aw i\u00e9\u00e9dV..\u00a7.@g:\u00a7 by the Apex Court in the case<\/p>\n
‘Aloft  Baidya (referred above), the Carder<\/p>\n
  V im;\u00a7u’g5’ad  Trial Ccsurt cannat be sustained and<\/p>\n
 _ the} same .59 \u00e9ftabie in be set aside as perverge, eapriciaus<\/p>\n
 .$ri6 x& r’r’s::ne:):;s and that pet\u00e9tionera shouid not be<\/p>\n
 -..e\u00a7 ;$m;:\u00a7e\u00a3\u20aced to radress their grievance under the statutory<\/p>\n
 T35 EEKEH COURT Q’? E{ARNAT&}~I.EX AT BA}1i3AL(}FiE \\’\\?.P’.}~Eo.1\u00a78\u00a3i\u00a7f2\u20ac}\ufb013<\/p>\n
 THE HEGR CQURT OF KARNATAKA. AT B\u00a33\u00a3~EGAL{3RE W’P.N<). t{J861f2(}\u20ac38
\n2%<\/p>\n
prexzieierze ef Sectiee 96 of the Cede ef Civii Preeedure<\/p>\n
and atse that, it is not e fit case to direct the litigant te<\/p>\n
redress \ufb02weir grtevence befere the appetiate Ceurt just<\/p>\n
because there is e cenetitetteeei provision to redreeje-\u00ab._4'i*~..<\/p>\n
their grievance which is inexpensive, speech} e;}"'ei''' :" A<\/p>\n
effective remedy.\n<\/p>\n
10. Further, Seemed eoerteei  <\/p>\n
petitioners feitiy submitted  deee..eetj’v_dief\u00a7:\u00a7te’V’<\/p>\n
regarding the feet that, were is iieiiipretiieifee fet ‘etett\u00e9tety
\neppee! as envisaged  the Civil<\/p>\n
Procedurevi'{3ede;:,’}:y ‘Set:teat;-.if”-ee:titi’\u20ac:mei’e have eeeght fer<\/p>\n
staying the’-oiperetieriilwlejjnldveeeetitien at the erdet passed<\/p>\n
by the Triei Ceu\u00a7’t,i..ift d7ee’e”Vnet mean or prohibit the<\/p>\n
*ip5e’t:it.ioi:ei*e?~.”t:: “‘in;vekeVVttie extre erd\u00e9nery juriedictiee es<\/p>\n
eevteeigettvv.i;ede!f’jtt\u00e9e eenetitutienet prevteien. Therefere,<\/p>\n
 there is ee.__ibei5ter this Court te entertetn the instant writ<\/p>\n
‘v’v.”pet;t\u00a7en_ esthie Cam: has get ide end exeieeive pewere<\/p>\n
 tge eeteztete and interfere i e etdet peeeed by the<\/p>\n
–_”__”””””””‘J’<\/p>\n
i  ‘ ~     EEGH COEERT Q? }i.AR}-\u00a7A’\u00a7A}{A A”? EEA’:*\u00a7z’3z%Ii.{I?RE W.P.E\\ic::\u00bb.i ift\ufb01\ufb02fi-Ett\ufb02\ufb01<\/p>\n
Hi THE Ezilfxii CQEERT Q17 K\u00a31.R.N?;T,\u00a7\u00a7KS\u00a3 AT ‘8A’\u00a3~\u00a7GALORE ‘s\u00a5.\u00a7’}.’~Es$, l(1S!.\u20ac\\’1!2f}(}$<\/p>\n
25<\/span><\/p>\n
Court beiaw. Therefcsre, he prayed that, the ordeaf’___<\/p>\n
impugned is Eiabie to be set aside with exernpiary aastrg’ Q<\/p>\n
‘$1. Further, in reply is the submissian   <\/p>\n
ieamed counsef appearing fer respeng*3’\u00e9*:*\ufb01~.~:s\u00ab amt’! t%;e c:3s:.ze*–1’\u00ab’ L”<\/p>\n
law reported in A.i.R. 19% 5:: 9.2384, :-eJ%seaj:;;~\u00a2;: mg <\/p>\n
him, learned caunsei appearing fwgjietitismess ‘submiited<\/p>\n
that, the said judgment cit&\u00a7i’~~.me{\u00e9\u00a5y:_\u00a7\u00e9\u00e9’@\u00e9\u00a7”\u20acha\u20ac:,  oirvjder
\nef rejec\u00e9ien sf 3 pgaint   11 is
\napps-atabie undegf   (if  Code:\n<\/p>\n
and it daes ngt\u20ac.\u00a7.n.V any propasitian
\nthat, beca:;~se   seem: 95 9f tha cm<\/p>\n
\ufb01es, no Writiiesg. –  the gudgment reparted<\/p>\n
i4_r}V.A.3.R,._i\u00a7 Qt”?4 (2)  reiied upcm by respendents,<\/p>\n
‘A*:ha:1:;’,”~~’:t}_e said judgment is an Seetian H5 of<\/p>\n
 the  v cf’ IC}_\u00a7\\\u00a7\u00a7=.%”‘ Pmcadure v’\u00a7z\u00bb\u00bb-a-wviz Appea\u00e9 under<\/p>\n
 ._ .SaCf$\u00a70\ufb02’.”Q5; tZ\u00a7f.}\u20aci’L:\u20ac CPC and Seatien ‘M5 ef the CPS<\/p>\n
f_’_”\u00abV\u00a2fa:ri_’r:\u00e9:t’Lbe eicguated to Ar\u00e9icies 226 and 227 which are<\/p>\n
 b.f a*’\u00a7ic ;features of we Constitution. in rep\u00a7y to the<\/p>\n
33% ‘”‘.i.’HE Hifi\ufb01 CCT3LE’R’\u00a7’ OF KA\u00a7{NA’FAKA A}? BAEEGALURE wmzg, sogmzeea<\/p>\n
{N THE H212}-H CGURT OF K.5&RI’~\u00a7.\u00a35s.T.”aK..45’1 AT BAN(3.\u00a3’~.L\ufb013E.E W.PC\u00a3*\u00a7.Q. 208A5}I’?.\u20ac}\u20acJ$
\n26<\/span><\/p>\n
reiianoe piaced by teamed counsel for respendents on____<\/p>\n
the judgment reparted in ELR. 1992 s<a;~.35s? ($=;;s:V'%%%%jL <\/p>\n
Bench), learned counsel appearing far pet\u00a7\u00a3i.Gnerr$'L-"  H<\/p>\n
submitted that as per the said judgrn\u00e9nt,' \u00ab{}\u20ac}{\u20aciC&" <\/p>\n
Sectisn 125 is nacessary oniy if the ac{,<l_\u00e9"ga .\u00a7 er bi\ufb01g-v*_; g'A:a<\u00a7, 'of  <\/p>\n
the Society or Gf\ufb01ser 93' the Soc\u00e9ef\ufb01i\ufb01r beth'i"a.\u00bb}a't\u00e9E\u00a7 <\/p>\n
constitution, management  '  'the' v\u00e9o\u00e9iaty
\nand in the instant__ czase\ufb02\ufb02 % %%;.;;mved at
\nparagraph 38  Tria\u00a5 Caurt
\n'that, the piaifg\ufb01   Es erroneaus.\n<\/p>\n
Further, he5;Vvv’sub\u00a7f\u00a7Aif%\u00e9d:Vt:;\u00a7”at,\u00bb”‘$\u00a7{\u00e9….gje:3’ision reported in {LR<\/p>\n
2094 %(ar.14\u00ab4;E’:___iss ncii’ r\u00e9\u00e9gva\ufb01\u00e9 {0 the case an hand and<\/p>\n
fhe  uhgs b\u00e9 ‘e’n.VV:~\u00a7\u00a7{{Hc ;\u00a7sgiy cited by the caunsei for<\/p>\n
regpg\ufb01denizg.’ ‘ . = ‘= ._<\/p>\n
 ‘V  learned ceunse\u00e9 fer pwtitimers<\/p>\n
.. ‘_’*_~\u00ab.’_s;ub;:}%tt$2c3~~ the desis\u00e9ons reporied in I.L_R. 19,73<\/p>\n
 E\/a\u00a7{V;\u00a7.’;3:>\u00a7\/E}Is-235 and LLR- 1973 Vo!.23 My3_1098, which<\/p>\n
.   on the po\ufb01nt and have not been overruled til!<\/p>\n
A<\/p>\n
33′? TEE HJFIEH C*’C}UR’? OF KAR?\u20acATAKA A’? BANGALORE ‘v’3.\u00bb’P.No. \u00a7{}36i:’2\u00a7iII8<\/p>\n
{N THE HKEH CQLERT <35 KARN.15tT.AK.A AT 'BANGALQR.B WPNQ. 1686 if2.(1GS
\n2'7<\/p>\n
date, have met been eeneidered by the Triei Ceurt.
\nTherefore, finaiiy he submitted that, the impugned order<\/p>\n
passed by Triei Court is petentiy ermneeue, perverse,<\/p>\n
\ufb02agrant, vioietive and in tote! disregard er the St3ft}'ft\u20acJi':y_:'_:'._V_<\/p>\n
provisions of Order 7 Ruie 11 CPC and if<\/p>\n
impugned erder is passed bese\u00a2i,…VQniy  it  it<\/p>\n
3 ' .\n<\/p>\n
unwarranted assumption and ;3resr;_ini’ptien_”‘  <\/p>\n
respondent Nr:z.4 is e ee-mem’eer~V.._of firet__ re\u00a7f;’p.g3ririer’rt. <\/p>\n
The Trial Ceurt was under an erren’ee;;e’Veeeuniptienrrtriet,<\/p>\n
fourth respondent is e dn_1’ereber” __ehd_’r..v”e<;cerdingiy<\/p>\n
committec\ufb01e grei\u00e9e'irerrjer_ir:~:\u00a7:;enz:itrding that, preyere (is)<\/p>\n
end (c) to 'met  upen the conetitutieri,<\/p>\n
v'_rneneg_eitjer\u00a7t, beeirieeepfvthe Society. Even eeeurning<\/p>\n
ereyere.(b.)':'~ee\u00a7" ..(c) tench upon the eenetitutien,<\/p>\n
 '–._._meneg'e'rrrerrt  ef the Scneiety, the Trial Ceurt<\/p>\n
. eught te heike etreck off preyere (b) and (:3) es ieid down<\/p>\n
 iby:i:trre:\u00bbi\u00a7pex Court in AER. 2004 SC 1801 and thereafter<\/p>\n
 ':cieQ_icied the matter. Heno%eeping in View at! these<\/p>\n
{N THE HEGB COURT C}? KARNATAKA AT E.A3\\iGALORE W.?~'.N<:s.1\u20ac}\u00ae61f20G8<\/p>\n
{N THE HIGH CQURT OF KARNATAKA AT B\u00a7.NC3ALCiRE W.P.NQ' 1f}S\u00e9Ei'2Q08
\n28<\/span><\/p>\n
factcxrs, the order impugned cannot be wstained and it is<\/p>\n
\ufb01abie to be set aside at the th:*es;ho%d_<\/p>\n
13. Per contra, {earned counsel appearing_f\u00e9}”fif\u00e9f[j–:  _<\/p>\n
rmpzsndent, inter aiia, contended andsui:3\u00e9i:\u00e9;n%.E:afg\u00a7\u00a7d.’_’_:VAV  <\/p>\n
stating that, the carder impugned pais s\u00e9%3T”E5y  <\/p>\n
Court is in accordance wfth thevLj”‘Fa\u00a5av\u00e9Vrst__ ‘:33\u00a73{3d’a\u00a3tiry <\/p>\n
previsions 9f the Code  Civi5″”‘F:’\u00a7\u00a2r\u00a7\u00a7\u00e9jd;;{e “ah’d ‘\ufb01at,
\nprayers (b) and (3) 3:o;z\u00a3::Vh.   l\u00a7j?vev2.A\/”.::V’,x;’\u00a7\u20ac3n=.atitutien,
\nmanagement and” .;t\u00a71Jsi:4a%\u00a7;{\u00a7’.:.V~::of* %5e…:.___:.f’sgespondent.
\nTherefore, the  C\u00e9nsidered the
\nwell settlecii   by this Caurt, and
\nafter appre\u00a5\u00e9’-s#r\u00a7V”r’w:;’qL”‘”materiaI available on \ufb01ie<\/p>\n
and aftefgf’ ‘v<:.a.re1';{x!'-\u00bbp\u00a7_e\u00a7.ir{'js*,a\u00a7 Vi'  the averments made by<\/p>\n
  petition and the objecticzns f\ufb01ed by<\/p>\n
 re9\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7ah'd.\u00a7,\u00a7t,s":'= , _ur\u00e9\ufb01sf rightiy a\ufb02owed :.A.:v and<\/p>\n
 \u00a2r:n$eq'{3'erzrt'%\u00a7  "r\u00e9}ec'\u00a3ad the plain: Hawever, Eearned<\/p>\n
; Vc\u00a7unse\u00a7~-appearing fer respondents, at the autset, raised<\/p>\n
_af'\u00ab.pr e\u00a7i\u00a7?:'z'iAnary {mention regarding the maintainabi\ufb01ty mf<\/p>\n
L<\/p>\n
EN THE HEGH CCKERT (BF E~ZARa'\\1ATAi<..\u00bb% AT E.AN\u20ac3ALORE W'P7E~5a. l\u20ac}8{*3i;'2G{}8<\/p>\n
{N THE HIGH CQURT OF KARNATAKA AT Bi'-.NGALOR.E W.P.N0= 18813223008
\n29<\/span><\/p>\n
the writ petitien before this Ceurt. He submitted that, the<\/p>\n
writ petition ie iiebie ta be rejected et the threeheld iteetf,<\/p>\n
holding that petitien Se not mainteineble for the reeee_e..:’_:’~.V_<\/p>\n
that, petitioners, without exhausting the etetutory_’–~et\u00a7eee.Itj’::  ~<\/p>\n
remedy, which \ufb02ee against the order.imp4ugr2ed’v”‘,eeseed’_’_;_  <\/p>\n
by the Tttei Court, as provided underesieetitvcml  it<\/p>\n
Code 01’ Civil Procedure, have e\u00a7proaehe;t’thte: <\/p>\n
Secendty, he submitted that petit’\u00a7u;’ijere”;\u00bbe._._ kne\u00a5.v\u00a5::g’*”tuE!y
\nwell, have feiied te complytetttt etattjteriytnejorepiience
\nat Secticm 125 ofti’te_:}(areete{r\u00a7e  societies<\/p>\n
5 n<\/p>\n
Act. Pe\ufb01t\u00a7enereAVV’ttes;e_::’e bT’etetu_tary remedy ef eeeetizng<\/p>\n
the order \u00a7ntpu4_’gnejct”  the Triei Ceurt by titing<\/p>\n
er} eppetette the  ttseif and they cannet by-\n<\/p>\n
A’;3.g-eeV”*\u00bbthevremedy and take reeeuree tn the<\/p>\n
 ereceedtngv\ufb01e  Artiste 227′ of the Constitution ef<\/p>\n
 ev eeuree of ectien may enebte e i\u00e9ttgent te<\/p>\n
‘  ;_defeet e%_\u00a5 the pmvie\u00e9ene ef the etetute which may prmsiee<\/p>\n
.  ,…\u00a7iVV\ufb02;%;grte%n Ceneitione fer fitir\ufb01he eppeai, tike Eimttet\u00e9en,<\/p>\n
  Hiili\ufb01 CTCEURT OF K’.AR’;\\’2AT:”xKA AT BANGAi..i.’}FiE W?.No.i{t$\u20ac:’sif2GG8<\/p>\n
EN” “rm; HIGH com? 0? KARNATAKA A’? \u00a73\u00bbAN<T\u00a7\u00a3kL\u00bbORE WP.No.. 103:3 3.529%.
\n39<\/span><\/p>\n
payment 91′ court fee gr deposit (‘sf same ammznt or<\/p>\n
fulfi\ufb01ment: of some ether candi\ufb01ons fer entertaining the<\/p>\n
appeai. To substantiate the said submission, he piaceq’<\/p>\n
heavy reiiance on the judgment of the Apex <\/p>\n
reperted in Am. 2003 sc 2736 in the case   <\/p>\n
Chane’ Ra-tan Vs. Pandit Durga Prasan?’ (Q)     ‘V<\/p>\n
others and drew my specific attention m__  <\/p>\n
the said judgment and submitted”t!%\u00a7V\u00e9*{, whvier:   3<\/p>\n
statutory remedy :3? assaiiing t!7e\u00e9W_::g’:::::’i.\u00a7;;-:V*VV’ ‘Vpgssedv by? *che<\/p>\n
District C\u00a2x1rtviv;V}.A:f\u00a7i.\u00a7’ra.;c:;:::\u00a72:3’r~s appaai We High count itseif,<\/p>\n
pe\ufb01tioners:VV’ra ‘n’nc$t  said mmedy and take<\/p>\n
recourse’ is prdCe\u00a7;edV\u00a7nQsA’uhfd’7\u00e9* Ar\ufb01c\ufb02es 226 and 22? cf<\/p>\n
I-‘i’\u00a7he\u00ab.Qo’r\u00a7\u00e9\ufb01t;1tiar: pf indi\u00e9T’Such a recourse may enable 3<\/p>\n
 provisions; of the statute which may<\/p>\n
 “V”pmvidAe-\u00ab.._for,. ce\ufb01airz conditicrzs far fiiing the appeal, tika<\/p>\n
 . Vp\u00e9yment cf court fee er depcsit of same<\/p>\n
 2’_a r\u00a7nG:.:V:’it”A_or fui\ufb01iiment cof some eiher cenditiens far<\/p>\n
 ~  \u00e9\ufb01fe\ufb01taining the appea\u00e9. in the instant case, pat\u00e9tioners<\/p>\n
\/=4-w~<\/p>\n
3% ma. H}G}i \u20ac;}{)U\u00a7\u20ac’.T OF KARNATAKA xii’ BANGALGRE w.p.z\\.x~..ma52x’23a2<\/p>\n
 THE HI. 1′.}8\u00e9 \u00a7s’.’\u00e9\ufb0208
\n33<\/span><\/p>\n
are i\u00e9able \u00a39 pay huge court fee if crnm they opt ta \ufb01ie an<\/p>\n
appeai. in carder ta avoid payment ef court fee, they have<\/p>\n
chesen in present the instant writ pet\u00e9tiarx. Therefare, the<\/p>\n
writ petitim \ufb02ied by petitioners is \ufb01abia in be rejec:’\u00a3e;d…__’   <\/p>\n
1-4. Further, he pissed \ufb01reiiance on the   H<\/p>\n
the Supreme Court reported in A.f.R.'{‘\u00a7\u00a73 ASQ'”P-?38\u00a7’*\u00a3;:s_:  VVA_<\/p>\n
the case of Shamsher Siagh V3,: Raj\u00a3r\u00a7b’a~ f ‘Pr&s\u00a3\u00e93::f’..\u00e9\u00a7;\u00a7d   ‘<\/p>\n
others and submitted that, an  rejed\u00e9itz-\u00a7 _VV:TaV’: pi\u00e9int
\nunder Grder ?’ Ruie 11   ,_.\u00e9\u00e9ra\u00bb:gt:$’\u00a7\u00e9’?r’\u00a7 ent of’ the
\nadditienai murt fee d.emande.\u00a2. ig-af:};:)\u00e9aE\u00e9’b_!\u00e9”V\u00e9ss'”a decree<\/p>\n
and when z\u00e9ha, ii’: appeai by the High<\/p>\n
Court 3 aecenud}..s{ppe\u00e9%_\u00a7;?\u00e9kt\u00a7;}ici::_”.\u00a7Li\u00e9 under Section 100 CPS<\/p>\n
 an__the fch\ufb01tg~..4&he…dec%$icn of the first appeliate<\/p>\n
Coyrt.:.V\u00a3\u00a7;1.Ati1.s\u00a7’iirzf\u00e9rpfetatien 9? Sectinn “F (Ev) (0) is 3<\/p>\n
 15. “,MF’U{ih6F, learned ceunse! appearing for<\/p>\n
re\u00e9’\u00a7_:>nd\u00a7’:1ts placed heavy re\u00e9iarme on the judgment cf<\/p>\n
  in the case ef Alb%D’souza raparfed in 197-4<\/p>\n
 THE H.183 CTQJMRT ii}? E\u00a7ARN\ufb01L’?.AKA AT EA}’\u00ab\u20acGA1,0RE W.P.N0. E G8\u00e9i\u00a73\u20ac\u00e9{}$<\/p>\n
13\u00bb: “ma {~\u00a3\u00a3G\u00a7-1 exam? \u00a3’;3\u00a3<' ?{ARNA"\u00a3"A\u00a7iA AT E3AE'\u00bb39"}s3xLi\u00a7)Rj3 W.P'E\\Eea zcggazrzaag
\n3:2<\/p>\n
(2) K.L.J. page. 5'! wherein it $3 heid that, reg\u00e9ct\u00e9en czf 3—.._b<\/p>\n
piaint on the greund that the Civii Court <\/p>\n
jurisdiction ameunts ta a decree and is  '%<\/p>\n
under Sectien 96 91' CPC. Accordingiiigg\ufb02yiga\u00e9g.;.s';:\u00a7\u00ae: T. <\/p>\n
judgment reparted in Am. 1%4%%sna\u00a7
\njurisdiction \ufb01Eaut%,% –   decisian itse\u00e9f is net
\n: a’;:>\u00a7g3aEef:i:L1_j7:::%e’ ‘A.;}fV}i3  AA’E4\u00e9%g!’*%–~’ Smsrt directiy er indirec\ufb02y,<\/p>\n
e>’;_*c;Vi\u00abs~\u00a7\u00e9”‘ef*’s!f:e..”‘rg-vigiana\u00e9 jurisdict\u00e9an by the Court wou\u00e9d<\/p>\n
 L’*u….\u00bbnot Ea’  ‘\u00e9xc\u00e9ud-ed.” Tharefera, it was he\u00e9d by<\/p>\n
. ….’_j: ;’\\pexACour’iv.V_i:}:at, if an appeai \ufb01es to 3 subard\u00e9naste Ceurt<\/p>\n
anrci’V’\u20ach’a.c\u00a7ec\u00e9sian of such sabordinate Court is appewab\ufb01e<\/p>\n
L<\/p>\n
 TEE BREE \u20ac’fi”}UR:”E’ 0% \u00a7{..AR1’x}AT.\u00a2~.KA AT gaxesawgg ‘aa;*.\u00a7>n:~:c;A:::rs\u00bb:;1,r;m3<\/p>\n
IN THE Hie;-H {,’\u20ac;’l.?R.”{ :31? KAR.NA”EA’\u00a7. 1G8\ufb01E.!2\u00a231\u20ac)S
\n33<\/span><\/p>\n
to the High Caurt, the H\ufb01gh Cam: has no pewer to<\/p>\n
exercise its revi$i0na\u00a7 jurisdict\u00e9on.\n<\/p>\n
‘E6. Further, he has taken me thraugh <\/p>\n
reasoning regarded by thee Tria! Caurt regardin_;\u00a7””t’h\u00a7::.’.\/J: <\/p>\n
application \ufb02ied for staying the operatiqr: and.~’ze*x\u00e9\u00e9:j;:’\u00a7i\u00e9s’\u00a7a <\/p>\n
$1′ the impugned arder, wherein \u00a783:ff’\u00a3\u20ac\u00a7’d’..C{}!:;\u00a7!’}8\ufb01\u00a7!:” fd:’3–..A.”:’T1.T_’<\/p>\n
_piaintiffs — petitioners herein h3s”_?V_x_vi’:'”*a”3$a\u00a5f’i”:-3:5 ‘aeh\u00e9fr\u00e9\u00e9grti\u00e9y <\/p>\n
argued that, the “ma! Cnurt ha$V..p;\u00a7’ssed.L_the;’ 5:*dar~.:–.t~}nn
\nLmv on 36″‘ June 2003 and g;;aw*\u00a7nsg:n e  5,_A.:v \ufb01ied<\/p>\n
under Order 7′ Fi;u\u00a7\u00e9;; -_-11  ggr\ufb01sequantiy,<\/p>\n
rejecting {he _ \u00a7D{\u00a3i i?’!?;-~.._;%’\u00a33&I’E” r’~…__a:”n\u00a3)U\ufb01tS ta a decree.<\/p>\n
Therefore, it %;a. 3n vaf;.*;;3\u00e9a\u00a7A!a*–\u00a7):it-3 \u00e9ecree. Hence, it was<\/p>\n
gqbmiitecfihat, durV’ing *cvv!ff:_\u00a7 \ufb01endency :31′ the suit, the order<\/p>\n
c>f._Enj;jVnc:ti:3n_wasbggerative against the respendents and<\/p>\n
 vtherefnrheg pe’E\u00a7fi\u00a7\u00a7r#’& rs – piairxtiffs were des\u00e9raus af<\/p>\n
_  ~.._’;;}*:a\u00a7’!eng\u00a7”ngvi\ufb01j\u00e9v xarder \u00e9ated 30*” June 2008. Hence, if<\/p>\n
izhezf’ .Vi%1jt;:nction order was net cantinued, great and<\/p>\n
 %:\u00a7\u00a3\u00e9pa\u00e9\u00a3’abEe Sass wautd be\/\u00e9gused ta the ;3\u00a5ai:’2\u20ac\u00a7ffs<\/p>\n
e~———~\u00ab–7<\/p>\n
i1*=:;  Hi\ufb01\ufb01 :t:’r*a\u00ab:1′..i.\u00a7e;<$E by
\npetitioners as not main{a%V:f\u00a7;a2\u00a7i'e.v\ufb01r?' of
\navaiiabiiity ef.appga\u00a7i:f$me{\u00a7\u00a7'.V';":1:  V  "\n<\/p>\n
17. So fa}   raisad by ieamed<\/p>\n
counset far pe_%.%tixc\u00a5\u00a5..:s;rs_V’raga;\u00a7\u00a7in_g\u00ab {non cempiiance of the<\/p>\n
statutory ;3rtN%s:._icz.nv”o’f 41′  of the Karnataka C0-<\/p>\n
_:,3peratisIe\u00a7.\u00a7 ‘Seciati\u00e9s-\u00bb..Act is concerned, learned ceunsei<\/p>\n
?ap1p\u00e9 \u00a7arir_3g  =..A:V r:~:5p0nden%:s placed re\ufb01iance on the<\/p>\n
 gudgsn\u00e9nt am fsssun repcarted in am. 2994 Kar.”1445<\/p>\n
_   Ar\u00e9gy\u00e9s\u00e9far Cowaperative Hausing Saciefy Limited<\/p>\n
  Qdy\u00e9bfher Vs. Fakiragouda and Anofber) wherein it Es<\/p>\n
 1V7′—.t 1\u00a7ld_V_’%that, the grovision of\/Sectian 125 of the Ca-<\/p>\n
….-\u00bb~—-~\u00bb—*-7<\/p>\n
  Hf\u00a7CfI”\u00a7 \u00a3Z.’.Qi,\u00a7i{{T (BF RARNATAKA AT EANG.e%\u00a7..,C}R.\u00a7?i ‘e’e’.i3′.’P<\u00a7o.iQ8\u00a3\u00a7}!2\ufb01S\u00e9\u00a7<\/p>\n
173% EH5 Hi\ufb01iri CSURE" OF KARNATAKA KT BANGALQRE W(P.N0q 208t\u00a7E…?2\u20ac!Q8
\n35<\/span><\/p>\n
oparative Sac\u00e9eties Act are attracted since the re\u00e9ief<\/p>\n
sought for by the Qlaintifis aaainst the Sm\u00e9etv re\u00e9ate-3″\u20ackiaf”~\u00ab.:T”‘\u00ab__<\/p>\n
the busimasses of the Ssciety and any gersun s.\u00ab:=:e}c\u00a7r}__{,;:1:” H<\/p>\n
rei\u00e9ef against the socieg which touc\ufb01s the \u00a3:\u00abL:s.i:’\u00a7 e’-.i~:.”;-; sf  A
\nthe saacietg, such Qerson being 3 me\ufb01bgdr r20 ‘membe’r–;_'”~., <\/p>\n
is of nu reievance.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
18. Further, piacingi~.;fg!iar:\u00e9’e ‘{i:;\u00a73 f\u00a7:\u00a7 F\ufb01i\u00e9 “\ufb01\u00e9\u00e9nch
\ndecisian as this Ceurt reperkedksngagg_&L4\u00a79@Kar.P.3537
\n{Kr\u00e9shi Matty Kshe-ef?:V1Utp\u00e9datSe’\u00e9\u00a7”: vwgmaggna Sarhakari<\/p>\n
Sang}? Niyatrz\ufb01\ufb02 v.:AV’1ef\u00e9;’riied ceunsei far<\/p>\n
respendersigs  !-\u00e9otiae under Sect\u00e9cn 125<\/p>\n
u<\/p>\n
ES mandat\u00e9rg ‘where AS’: \u00bb–ir\u00a7”-\ufb01siestian with rgferenge ta<\/p>\n
$oc\u00e9g_’\u00a75iM._\u00a7\u00a7irV Gf\ufb01caf’ Ac.>V:9_:__};::>t!\ufb01 and re\u00a5a____3:_\u00a7s to c:enstit_;._:t\u00a7.9n,<\/p>\n
;;51_ana\u00a7.eVma\ufb01t.sribgggjnesg :3? the Sc_gg\u00a7etv.”<\/p>\n
  non maintainability of the wr%\u00b0t<\/p>\n
 p%t\u00a7t\u00a7on,’ ‘ .. Vi’\u00a7aafr\u00a7ed counsel far respondentd piaced<\/p>\n
Nthe judgment in the case caf Surya {Dev Raf<\/p>\n
  Ear?) Chander R31′ and Qthers repoded in (2063) 6<\/p>\n
EN  HEKEH \u20ac7\u20ac}’sJRT \u00a33? }i.z*’aR.3’5fA’\u00a7’AK.A 15%.’? BANGALQRE \\\u00a7v’.?,No.iG86i\u00a320\u00a73<\/p>\n
IN THE HIGH CQURT ‘CF?’ i<ZAR.NATAK.A AT BANGALORE '\u00abMEiE\\3c:, 10\u00a7\u00a761.f2i}f}8
\n36<\/span><\/p>\n
SUPREME COURT CASES 675 and submitted that\ufb02’<\/p>\n
“At the end, we may ssum up by saying that the awe;<\/p>\n
there but the exercise is discretienarv which   ”<\/p>\n
Qovemed soieiv by the dictatea of \u00e9tsiciic-53! t;ons;\u00a7&as\u00a7rsc:V:ev–.i’.V <\/p>\n
enriched by iudiciai exper\u00e9ersce and p\u00a5’a\u00a2i\u00a7_<{ai wigiam  <\/p>\n
the ;'udge."\n<\/p>\n
32$. Having hear\u00e9 ~fg;r ;\u00a7&\u00e9fVi{io?\u00a7’ers
\nand warned ccunsgt for :f\u00a7{s*v.:;”‘.~iz_>_:*”;L%r71\u00a3\u00e9;*f::;ts–*”%i:$fA*’.I\u00a7:%\u00a7%*:s5cierable
\niength sf time   2008
\nand 20″‘   V\u00e9vaiuation of the<\/p>\n
reievant iv?;3at\u00a7=9:iAa:i’ –“.av_f\u00e9\u00a7’i!ab\u00ab!\u00a7’-…._;:,nI \ufb01le and the r\u00e9vai<\/p>\n
submission ma\ufb01a vb)?’ i_\u00e9aVrr:a:d..\u00bbL.\u00a20unsei appearing far the<\/p>\n
partEes,@:\u00e9 3tated”‘3\u00ab:.1pVzfa,’.the {allowing points arise fer<\/p>\n
con$i;ie\u00a7aiiz: n\u00ab:.% v ” V<\/p>\n
4; Mfetsruem the writ petition fi\ufb01ed by<\/p>\n
 pet:’tiQf\u00a7*ar*s is maintainabie under Article 227 of<\/p>\n
  ~ t}:\u00e9~_C013stitution mndia ?\n<\/p>\n
\/\u00ab,_…w.\n<\/p>\n
IN TEE HEGH, CTOURT Q? EARN ATAKMA fa’? SANGALCERE ‘a}&7.E’.E’*$c:.1{}8<%1,\u00ab'2{)(}3<\/p>\n
:1\u00bb: THE awn \u20ac'3{;)UR."i' <32: KARNATAKA AT Bz'~';;%J{}AL\u00a3f)RnE wmszo. was LSEILKES
\n37<\/span><\/p>\n
ii] WHETHER the sfafutary aotice<\/p>\n
mdar Section 125 sf the Kamafa\ufb01ca C0\u00bb <\/p>\n
aperartive Saaietias Act is mandafary ? and __  ”<\/p>\n
zzg wH5″rHEa petitianershare’jufsffff\u00e9i\ufb01,
\nin invoking Arficie 2:27 by fixing ,{haji’ir\u00a7:3f_\u00a7ar;t:” k <\/p>\n
writ petitian when they\/bgve }:=__ ‘statzzfdsy
\nmmedy sf assaiiing the \u00e9fdggf by \u00a3;;:5g%:;:e% \u00e9[
\nappeal to the High cam ifs\u00e9ff :5;  %  %
\nSince the subject mam\u00bb;m9;Vea[%;amn:s {:1 and<\/p>\n
{N} are identical   sake of<\/p>\n
oonven\u00e9engi\u00e9;”t%’1e\u00a7}vf.ar\u00e9:\u00a7:\u00a7ut\u00a7’b\u00a7d a\ufb01 d”\u00e9r\u00a7swerad taget-her.
\nReg. Paint N\u00bb::s’;\u20ac 51  <\/p>\n
Afgerv zgarefui p_\u00a3eimsaE of the order impugned, it is<\/p>\n
 Sactmn 2(2) cf tha C\u00e9vi} Procedure<\/p>\n
 Ceda fhat,”;;s7″_’vfv..d\u00e9;:%rke> ” means the fu:’ma% expression af<\/p>\n
 \ufb01n 8dj&\\%;\u00a7{i\u00a7.(‘;5;’::~l:’\u00a7.\u00a7(‘.ii\u00a5’*\u00a7.V’ which, so far aa regards the Court<\/p>\n
~.: “\u00e9$\u00a7pr\u00e93is\u00a7;jg \u00a7’t, csnciusiveiy determines. the rights of ‘(he<\/p>\n
.—-\u00ab———-‘-7<\/p>\n
 Hwith rwar\u00e9 to 533%; any cf the matters in<\/p>\n
EN THE Hii\ufb01-‘.i CCEURT Ci? 3~i.AR1’\\2ATA}\u00e9LA AT BANGALGRE ‘3aTP.iNe.1 188%}? 2088<\/p>\n
IN THE HIQH COURT C3? \u00a7<LARN&'fAK.A, AT 8AN<I}AL\u20ac3\u00a7,{.E W'?.NQ. 1086112068
\n38<\/span><\/p>\n
contrczversy in \ufb01ne suit and may be aithgr pre\u00e9iminary cg’<\/p>\n
\ufb01nal. Et sha\ufb01 be deemed to include the  <\/p>\n
pfa\u00e9nt and the determination Gf any ques’\u00a3\u00e9;c::iv:”_:—s{;fi’2\u00a7j\u00a7\u00a7i <\/p>\n
Section 144: but shah not \u00e9nclude W (Q  j::a;”d_i;i:d;A\u00a7c~#’\u00a7\u00a3i\u00a3:srj..LL:_ V<\/p>\n
{mm wh\u00e9ah an appea\u00e9 lies as; an appeai mm an \u20ac3s:*C\u00a7*::j=*.;_V_VjGr <\/p>\n
(b) any order 9? dismissal fer defae\u00a7uE t:n\n<\/p>\n
21. After carefu! pe$~f\u00a7i3a\u00a3 ;_>%:!\u00a7.e7*~– ‘impugned
\npassed by the Trial Ciaurt, i:.’%$v:fr\u00a7gn\u00a7fgg:t_:\u00a7\u00a7’.f$:ca of the<\/p>\n
said order that,’..’m’1-e;rrm’if{:f 939?} or materiai<\/p>\n
irrwu\ufb01ar\u00e9ty Va;:___   e\ufb01zmr\ufb01i\ufb01e\u00e9 by the Trial
\nCeurt near the ‘\u00a5–‘r\u00a3a\u00a7   h’\u00e9\u00a7$.:\u00a7%a?e5Sed tmyond the scope
\nand ambit caf tfS’e.4pra\\}:\u00a7$i\u00a7SVh3 statute nar there is any<\/p>\n
vpVe{yersi_\ufb013\u00a7’\u00ab:.  f%ag%\u00e935:3tv…..y;\u00a7a\u00a7ation ar disregard af tm<\/p>\n
sfiazui\u00e9fy~;>r0.xaf\u00a7$E\u00a7:)r\u00e9 :t:\u20ac.Qrder 7 Rule 21 (d) and Secticm<\/p>\n
 .125 of   Cowcperative Scvc\u00e9et\u00e9es Act. when<\/p>\n
..j_”_;\u00ab:g2ei\u00a7&.\u00a7,oner3 “have statutcry remedy ef ass:-ailing the order<\/p>\n
   :~ V \u00a5m\u00a7i}\u00a7ne\u00a7’..’passed by the Tria\u00a5 Cami”: by f\u00e9l\u00e9ng the appeal<\/p>\n
 Court \u00e9tseif, pet\u00e9\ufb01aners canmt by- pas:->3 the<\/p>\n
 m<:\u00a7% 1*L’;:iie,*~.::i=;,s;\u00a74’ViT:;::!*:”‘ u<\/p>\n
itseif prescribes the remedy cr proc\u00e9du\u00e9e ~*\u00a7ar'”‘ari’f{$feii1g\u00e9_L’*~-. “1T’<\/p>\n
\u00e9he right at \u00a7Ea_w\u00a7iiity, resort must’&_3 ef’~whad {:3 .thatVAl\ufb01;arEi%:;’u%a;<\/p>\n
statutory remaciy before u 3ee!<%::\u00a7"_:*–\u20ache:_ di\u00e97c;'at\u00a7s\u00a7xarv
\nremedy under Articie 226 eftiie   __Fur'the%*, it
\nis hair} that this:..C;':a\u00a7;'f't \u00e9ziA_Ae)\u00a7?:\u00e9'psi%aAf\u00a7' \u00e9.\u00a7_'~.cv$_$\u00e9\u00e9, can \u00e9saue<\/p>\n
writ of certi\u00e9\ufb01\u00e9\u00e9rfji-""2;}\u00a5%i9\u00e9':*e  '*;\u00a7j9\u00a7f'e–.. V\u00a7s \u00a3.\u00a7c:z2fr2;3\u00a7ate %ack sf<\/p>\n
jur\u00e9sdict\ufb01or\ufb02er 4\ufb011\u00e93'uthc:ri'\u00a3y or the Tribuna\ufb01<\/p>\n
in take acti'c::=1 var'-ther\u00e9'~…'-being 3 contravent\u00e9an Q?<\/p>\n
 :'.ights5V"'a=:':s\u00a3–\u00ab'Viz?:a-re has been a vimatien en'<\/p>\n
\u00a5'L1\u00a7\u00a2t~'5' 5G'5. \u00a31':-:;\u00a7u%'.a\u00a3.T_}u.;atice and the campaign? autharit\u00e9ea\ufb01<\/p>\n
 aqua\u00e9i' .._'jjT:\u00a7.:c\u00a7ic;=.5a'i: }.a'{}thor%ties, Tribuna\u00e9s acted under the<\/p>\n
– i,”v”p_\ufb01::\\{Ais\u00a70n”{}f_ E’-aw, which ultra v\u00e9reg, then} mt wi\ufb01wstanding<\/p>\n
“\u20ac\u00a7} e–..Vex\u00e9s%ence of an aiternative mmady this Gasurt gar:<\/p>\n
‘::’_\u00a72~;’ez–‘\u00a7ise its jurisdiction in grant re\u00e9ief. in the present<\/p>\n
L<\/p>\n
i\u00a73’~2 THE HEGH CCEURT SF KARNAWKKR AT BANGAEJGRE ‘\u20ac3e’.E’.:\\Ea.\u00a7{}$\u00a3Six’;1C\u00a2\u20ac!E\u00a7<\/p>\n
TIRE THE Ei1{3HCC3UR.”I’Q\u00a33 K.ARNLAT.5%}~IA 3%.’? \u00a7’,~A!?\u20acC}A.LC3RE \\.\u00bb\u00a5.P.Nt:m 1\u20ac23\u20acSi5′?.13\u20ac)8
\n\u00a30<\/p>\n
ceee on hand, $3: Ee e\u00e9gni\ufb01cent te nete that, pei\u00a7tioeerje*–,T<\/p>\n
have feed the eppi\u00e9ee\ufb01ee seeking siey ef the   <\/p>\n
end executien of the impugned order eeeeed _b;:.{heVv 3 [<\/p>\n
Court, wherein ieemeci couneei :_-fer? ‘{>etEf\u00a7t\u00a7’e:1e?ee.___  AA<\/p>\n
vehementiy erguee befere the T’rie_V! Ceerf and<\/p>\n
rmerded by the Tee? Ceurt
\npassed in O.S_Ne.40!2G{1V7″‘ei1   ‘Z:{_3V edd\u00e9t\u00e9enet
\nmy sea Judgeg: .__Bee\u00a7e\u00a7*e}fe  the eeid
\n\u00a7.A.EV under    \u00e9eoeedure Cede
\nend re}ec\u00a7;%i”zg’\ufb01e’:eie:ie\u00a7”\u00abeef’eeete,’teeea\ufb01decree and ii is en
\neppee%ab%\u00a7e~_deere\u00a7 QMieeee\u00e9f\u00e9eeiihy euem\u00e9eed by ceunee%<\/p>\n
fer pEein\u20acv\u00a7ffe *e”:e\u00a7 \u00abee~r\u00e9eg’ tee pendent}: ef the suit, en<\/p>\n
erder efi:in\u00a7;enc\u20ac*.iAen eeeegieret\u00e9ng ega\u00e9net the defendente<\/p>\n
:eep5eedeenfe\u00ab._’.er%*n:’\u00a3.e\u00e9aerefere, pie\u00e9nti\ufb01e \u00ab~ pet\u00e9tienere are<\/p>\n
2  dee\u00e9reue of ‘ef\u00e9\u00a7’e\u00a7\u00a7Veng\u00a7eg the erder passed by the Tee;<\/p>\n
 z “~–\u00ab”:\u00a7’\u00a3’sie eeequivoeei ceteger\u00e9cei vehement<\/p>\n
 _’eeee1iee\u00a7Aen made by \u00a3eerned ceeneei fer me\u00e9ntiffe befere<\/p>\n
T ‘Triei Cam’: eieariy ewdicetee end \u00e9mpiiee and proves<\/p>\n
EN THE HKEH EECEURT GP K.A}?’\u00a3NATA}iA ;%.T P1A?%\u00a7{i.+’&L?C}}3.E ‘W.’\u00a3?’.Ne. } \u20ac\u00a7R\u00e9%1.=”2$f}S<\/p>\n
3:: THE HIGH <:oL'B:r <3? KAR.NATAKA AT BANGALQRE W.P.N0k msmxaczes
\n\u00a31<\/p>\n
beyand 3H maaonabke daubts that, pmintiffa – pet\u00a7tic}nar$.___<\/p>\n
are we\ufb02 aware cf this fact and this fact is; neat diaputgdf <\/p>\n
feamed counsei for petiticners during the co1;:rff\u00a7:.ajV*_Ta\u00a7' '%<\/p>\n
submissien. Further, the submissid\ufb01\u00e9 "<3? me J <\/p>\n
counsei fer petitinners that, _.they  inv;<j:k%.a "\u20ac\u00a5'1e"'; ' '<\/p>\n
extraordinary jurisdiction undef'V"L'L\u00bb::\u00a7\u00a7ft\u00a7c\u00a7e
\nC-anst\u00a7tu'\u00a3ion of india oswgjj\ufb01fxe  thVe H grder
\n%mpugnad is f\u00e9agran\ufb01t, :s;\u00a7av\u00a7;afrix\u00a2%'_e:–..a:r.'\u00a7ev:V:\u00a7!A  "txt2 1_.; :;.'\u00a7b':–.c:?\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7mgard 3%
\nstatutary prev\u00a5s.\u00a7_Va3a\u00a7\u00e9\u00a7A':.1:f(;;:'f;.\u00a7i   far the
\nreasan shag bywpass the
\nstatutury r\u00e9%=;fr1e_gj the relevant prmzisions<\/p>\n
ef the Statut;ei'~–g:4nd,v \u00a36 _\u00e9\u00a7EL\u00a7;:\u00a7e:_':3\u00e9yment ef oaurt fee has<\/p>\n
faz\ufb01gen r\u00a7::\u00a7;\u00a7{;{saVvtn ;A'\ufb01\u00a7a:\u00a3,e,___2i2? of the Ccans\ufb01tution :31' India.<\/p>\n
\u00a7\ufb01.__\u00a3\u00a71e"'\u00a7ngia_;i1E  as rightiy painted out by warned<\/p>\n
 }.___caunse\u00a3"fbr vr5e\u00a7,':sj_:faVr.*icv"\u00a7ents, petifionsers just its by\u00bb-pass the<\/p>\n
_ _ _ :._'_3\u00a7abi_'\u00a7\u00a7ty for~~\u00a7\u00a7\u00e93*n\u00a7ent :3? caurt fee, have chaser: to present<\/p>\n
*._'_' '&:e?f"_in$;$'nt writ petition by raising untenable and<\/p>\n
ungggfiainabie graunds. Knowing fui\ufb01y we", petitianera<\/p>\n
E23 3\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7?ii\u00e9\u00a7%$EE\ufb01f\u00a7R? OF :s:ARNA?Am AT BANGA\u00a7_C}RE wmxo. 2035152392<\/p>\n
EN THE Hl\ufb01fii\u00e9-E CQURT Q? K.ARE\\iATAK\u00a7: AT BANGALQRE WRNO. 2{}?\u00a7{*}}..f'2(}j}\u00a7<\/p>\n
thrcugh their' c:eunse\u00a3 before the Triai Cmm, have put <\/p>\n
writing that, they want to assail the mrrectness <\/p>\n
order impugned by way on' filing the appeal    H<\/p>\n
High Caurt. Such being the ease, nevi,"\u00e9:{:\u20aci:is'\u00a7ur\u00e9\u00a2tL\u00a7_%\u00e9\u00a7V'_ <\/p>\n
is not justs\ufb01ab\ufb01e en the par': of p\u00a2\ufb01tio\ufb01:a;9\u00e9–..ta inj.Qr.*;&.%’f.v7:V%VA1\u00bb:s; Fi’;i7\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7’:VV–“;,’3:5urt \u00a5n ‘the
\ncase af Seth   _.:F’.fa:%f\u00a7t:}fi:”S:;rga Prased
\nreported in Am. ‘1i..\u00e9:.f2:G.? ‘ s\u00e9kmsme  }3E)\u00a3}RT P_2?’38_
\nParagraph :13 9%’ t%i\u00e9V”reads thus:\n<\/p>\n
“13.}_VEveV:%1.;;ti\u00a7ve7ra\u00a7-ise, the View taken by
\n%he_i\u20ac QivisionV”  of the High Ccsurt for
\n ‘refmiiiz\u00e9g we sbjectiors of the appe\ufb01ant
\n  ‘%:e.\u00a7g.iarci\u00a7:\u00b02.g;j”  mainta\u00e9nab\u00e9\ufb01\u00e9ty ref the writ
\nan atternative remedy daes not<\/p>\n
 div’\u00e9sstVf%\u00a7e\u00a7vHigh Ceurt of Em powers ts entertain<\/p>\n
J  “pa?i\ufb01o\u00a3i under misses 226 and 22? 93′ the<\/p>\n
” “A.C’:mstitution, hag hardly any appiicatinn an the<\/p>\n
    facts cf the present case. it has been sawed<\/p>\n
\/2\u00bb<\/p>\n
EN ‘E*\u00a7\u00ab:\u00a3_ Hi\ufb01\ufb01 {Tf.}E_’;’-R.’\u00a7’ (:21: K..AR?\u20ac~E$,’?\u00a7_K;% AT BANGALGRE xw:~ea. :aga;:2\u00e95\u00e9<\/p>\n
IN THE meg \u00e9fCJUR’F oar KARNATAKA AT eaecmeeee w.e.:~e. 1i)$<31:'?;(}i}$
\n43<\/span><\/p>\n
by a long cetena af decision ‘that v
\nor iiebitm is created tax: a ete_Lgte, which 213$}:<\/p>\n
Qreecribee the gemeqv gr erogedurg fer
\nenferging the right or Iiebmtv reeert muetV_\u00a7\u00a7_g~..V. <\/p>\n
had te that Qertict\ufb01ar statutegg rerhe\ufb01jg. b\u00e9aferejl’. V<\/p>\n
seeking the d\u00e9eeretionerv re\ufb01aeg\u00e9f ‘”{_._:ede\u00a7f’  _
\n$11226 ef the Cen,e”t%tutic’r\u00e9.’\u00ab–.._V. Thie. Vhmie
\nexhaueticm cf etetutery remec\u00a7\u00a7ee?%’ie_ne Eieebive ” ‘
\nruie of peiicy, cenvenijenee ehh’d”;*\u00a7iee;ifetion arid
\nthe Ceurt in be excef3t\u00e9ehe\u00a7w:’1″‘e’ee:e1\u00a7\u00a7. ees;.;e a
\ndiecreticahery wr\u00a7t.__ef gertmg:\u00a7.% A\\\u00a3%.\u00a5he?’e  is
\neompte\u00e9e _3eek  \u20ache:’\u20acIa%\ufb01cer or<\/p>\n
eutherity 2’  {eke  ectien :31″\n<\/p>\n
there heee-“.\u00a7:;ee:y’\u00ab.__\u00a7….___ eeeireventien ef
\nfundenieetai “:*\u00a7gh?.e~ :_er:__’:”th’ere hae been a<\/p>\n
viuietien c\u00e9f t_fu\u00a7ee’– efv.ne5[urel }i.\u00a38′{iC8 er where<\/p>\n
 thfe”‘:~tr\u00a7b:uh_a\u00a5 af:tec\u00a3——–e’nder a prov\u00e9e\u00e9on ef law,<\/p>\n
‘ ;.whEc’ra.__ieh e{{fe.._viree, then netwithstending the
\n ~.e\ufb01.\u00a7e{e’\ufb015e.__04f,”e.h eitemetive remedy, the High
\nC”eurt.._t:eefexerciee its jurisd\u00e9ction \ufb01e grant the<\/p>\n
 AA re\u00a7ie’f.-…h’ En the present case, the eiternetive
\n V.i%e.\u00a7AfA)edy ef cheiienging the judgment ef the
\nVgceurt was nef befnre some other ferum er<\/p>\n
H Tribunal Gr: the can ery, by virtue ef eub<\/p>\n
_,,._….—-7<\/p>\n
 “TEE HKEH CCEURT OF KARNAT\u00a7tK;k AT EANGALEERE W.P.?%30. 1{}862\u00a72\u20ac3{)$<\/p>\n
\u00a7f?~Z. “ME 1+\u00a3\u00a7(TeH CGURT Q1? KARNATAKA AT BANGAUDRE W.P.E\\3Q. XOSGEKEQQQ
\n44<\/span><\/p>\n
section (3) of Section 2′? 9f the Act the srder
\npassed by the Court amounted to 3 decree<\/p>\n
againgt which an appeal iay tn the High Caurt.<\/p>\n
When the party had statutorv remetgh! sf”\n<\/p>\n
assai\u00e9ing \ufb01ne order passed by the Dist\ufb01us\ufb01t ‘<\/p>\n
Court by \ufb01\ufb01ng an agpea\u00e9 to the AA>VHigh  ‘<\/p>\n
\u00e9tseif, he amid not bypass *1:he1 _sa>i\ufb02 :%em\u00e9dy’ : <\/p>\n
and take racsurse ta Qrc;ce\u00e94d\u00a7r\u00a7\u00a73~$ und.:er ‘ ” Vv 1.
\nAr\u00a3s.226 and 22? of the cuns\ufb01mon.  A<\/p>\n
caursse 93′ actian may ena.b\u00a7\u00e9”Va-“~\u00bb..i_itig\u00e9:’ai-in
\ngiefea’: the grevisions123$)”\u00a3he’\u00ab.$t?gt\u00a7J{\u00e9.~:.\u00a7a.\u00ab\u00a7\u00a7ic:h rnav
\npmvide for ceftain :;:;}r:”;i’\u00a7tiot}s,:.L fc$r  fi?\u00a7:i};;” the<\/p>\n
ggpeai \ufb01ke !irr\u00a7%taiien;=. payr:\u00e9e\ufb01\u20acTcf”mu\u00a7'{ fee 0:”<\/p>\n
dewgit czf ;\u00e9rn\u00bb;\u00a7u.b:f:af::…;;-:f– fu\ufb01f\u00e9\ufb02ment 9% same
\nether \u00a20\u00a7sd\u00a5ti9n$–e\ufb01’Era\u00a7{E3’\u00a7n\u00a7ng ma anpaeai.”
\n_. _ (em7;f;ha;si3, suf\u00a7p3Vi”e5d)
\n  :~\u00a7f”_*:%1Ae”vr\u00a7a;’1:%\u00a7’V\u00a7:i\u00a7f’\ufb01ne wait sewed princzipies ef iaw mid
\n i’.\u00a7__’\u00a7 the_  Caurt in tha afaresaid case $3 taken<\/p>\n
\u00ab  canaic\u00e9gfation, the game is d\u00e9rac\ufb01y app\ufb01cab\ufb01e is the<\/p>\n
 ~ \u00ab. .  V   fa\u00e9i\u00e9 iand”.–‘cErcumstances 91′ cage an hand.<\/p>\n
T ~  HEGR IZEOURT can \u00a7{;~*xRNA.TAKA. ACE” ma; sfiz’-‘:.L\u00ab{i}’R;E ~s.w.:\u00abm. 2 amxzaaa<\/p>\n
1353 THE Hii\ufb02i ifj'{_’%{JR”\u00a3” {H7 K_ARI’\u00a7A.”\u00a7.$.\u00a7iL,A AT B\ufb01.NG.ALi3RE ‘\\V.P3’~f<3, W853} 3.:'"3\u20ac}\u20ac1$
\n45<\/span><\/p>\n
22. Further, in another judgment af the A.pex.___<\/p>\n
Court in the case of S3-d\u00e9mna Ladh Vs. <\/p>\n
insmrance Ca_Lfd_ and anathar repartad in  ‘%  H<\/p>\n
Supreme Com!’ Cases 524, ft is h\u00e9ki <\/p>\n
statute provides a right ta f\ufb01ielagn \ufb01pgvie\ufb01i c::\u00a7 \u00a7\u00a7nj’Et5ed:u.r–~ V’<\/p>\n
grounds, the said gmunds at'”\u00a3:\u00a7\u00e92!:eng\u00e9~ _z:.\u00a5i\u00e9i\u00a7\u00a5*:\u00a7\u00a3\u00a7
\neniarged by \ufb01xing a writ;::4’batit’i_$\u00a7i.:A:\u00a7\ufb01\u00aef’–\u00abArticE\u00a7sVAV22\u00a3
\nand 227 of tha canststutsc.srs%gt%m%ia’;’%L%%\u00ab%7\u00a7u%:he:, <\/p>\n
heid where 3   fii\u00e9 329$’  3f.:’:’b’7eaE has been<\/p>\n
ibrevided “fmj ft is\ufb01\ufb01~.sf.;;;vp\u00e9:$_”?{\u00a7\u00e9”vL\u00ab’H\u00a7k3’\u00a7\u00a7VV_ Czourt ta entertain a .<\/p>\n
Qa\ufb01it\u00e9csn uri=der_  Cong\ufb01tutien af india<\/p>\n
gver; if whg:\u00e9*L43″re\ufb01i\u00a7;\u00a7y;.t’sg:’_”s;va\u00a7{ of an aggeat has net<\/p>\n
gaen \ufb01vt\ufb01gi rouid#d’*~\u00a7:f___ag. sins: the erder and Eudgmant<\/p>\n
\u20ac>”f a V”i’}\u00a7stri<ff\u00a3\u00ab. giiidcgg. Further, it is aim heid that, $53<\/p>\n
'V "{;\u00a3–\u00a7f'i_s\u00a35\u00e91\u00e9\u00a2tian gganferfgg an th___\u00a7 Hiah Caurtg<\/p>\n
_ g\u00a7j_d_er  of tha Cersstitution 35 eamfined oniv ta<\/p>\n
 wb\u00e9iher an Enfer\u00e9ar Cczurt QB" Tribunai has Qmceeded<\/p>\n
'  -\u00a7r\u00a7\u00e9\u00a7\u20ach\u00a7nL% its grammars 3:15 not :3 carreat an arms' aggarent<\/p>\n
\/L<\/p>\n
{N 'IRE H\ufb01fm Cf*;}UR'f' ImRE W.\u00a73′.1\\\u00a7o.Ei}8\u00e91;’2[}\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7<\/p>\n
 THE MESH C<21?;}R,T OF KARNATAKA AT B,s%;\\K.EAL\u20ac}R.E W'.?3\u00a7Ze:. 1935 \u00a7.f2G&%\u00a7_
\n1%<\/p>\n
gm the face cf the recerd much !-ass :33' an error af iaw. Sr?<\/p>\n
exercising the supervssary pewer under Article 227 – <\/p>\n
Canstituiinn, the High Ceurt dues not act as an a;3;5\u00a7ei\u00a7?;:t}et}"'  <\/p>\n
Court or 3 tribune!' it is 3530 not Qerziii\u00e9s'&'b%3 Ea; H\u00e9g _ <\/p>\n
Caurt on a gatition \ufb02ied under A. V'<\/p>\n
Constitut\u00e9an ta reviaw or rewei Q'h..VV:'\u00a7he: evidje\ufb01avh\u00e9
\nwhich the inferior Caurt   Sam
\nnassed the order gr to  in the
\ndecisicn. Furth\u00e9-_'\u00e9r;'A'\u00a7f%iriV\u00a7$  of Aibert D*
\nSouza, ( referr\u00a7\u00a7  referred that,
\n" But, by has been sett\ufb01ad \ufb02y \ufb01he<\/p>\n
Supreme Ce'u%1_'_'ir:_SVf3J4'\u00a7?fh5:\u00a7\u00a7}& V. 5.; Diiion (3). The<\/p>\n
.Sa;preme.\u00a7.A:.CGL:rt h;ai's;.ja_fte:{ considering the de\ufb01aians;<\/p>\n
:9\u20ac;':fg\u00a7:$\u00e9;}:f?e~dVVbgfA_v't%2\u00a3;..%:'iyy Cauncif councii, A\ufb01fahabad H\u00a7gh<\/p>\n
   <Z;ouft'*a::5:t$'t\u00a5V1\u00a7\u00a7=.\u00e9 Q':-gj\u00e9\u00e9\u00e9han High Court, found as fa\u00e9iawsi<\/p>\n
~. an appeal \ufb01es against the<\/p>\n
  "asi\u00e9-udicfsatian d\u00e9recf\u00e9v to the H\u00e9gh Court ctr ta<\/p>\n
  7_3;h'0fher Ceurt fmm the decis\u00e9en sf which gig<\/p>\n
   ___.;a\u00a7p;*;eai \ufb01ea ta the High Coart' it has no powar<\/p>\n
\/L<\/p>\n
i:r~f""i""\u00a7?\u00a7\u00a7':?z\u00a7<:*a}-: caam 5;? KARMTAEEA A":"'BA:~e\u00a73:2f};\u00a3\u00a7v1h7ait\u00a7&’v’:LAt\ufb01laurt and the
\ndacis\u00e9on m’ such szg’bz2\u00a7fdinai<e':;\u20ac_i\u00a3;\u00a7;;%i..\u00a7.=x._%%$;::\u00a7\u00a7:E\u00e9'\u00a7\u00a7\u00e9e ta the
\nHigh Ccmrt,  nix?!  exercise\u00bb \u00e9tg<\/p>\n
_\u00a7mr\u00a7sdictien._ …. …2~'_5A'{$~ _iv".i'g:i5":\u00e9'i'..\u00a7.*_s.IV.p\u00e9ik\ufb01j\u00e9d' i\u20acs–:..r:.. Searne\u00e9 <.:cz:.mse\u00a3<\/p>\n
far ;'espan \u00e9a;n*?es.\u00a7,  \ufb01ght of appeal to the<\/p>\n
High court may $\u00ae\u00a3i0'\ufb01~.\u00a79:6~.–ut\u00a7f the cm: Pracedure Sada<\/p>\n
:_v\u00a7s~a\u00a7ia\u00a7\u00a3v3;ji\u00a73~ie, i.:a the ;Aj\u00e9's'\u00a7i'\u00a7a:;-*:1ile:'s. Being well aware of the<\/p>\n
s\u00e9i\ufb01e'; V T_;:ae\u20ac\u00a7'\u00a3*E\u00ab::;\ufb01\u00e9:r:2:g.: have iravoked the axtra ordinary<\/p>\n
' L"~…f 3:1-dia\u00bb Therefere, having regard in the<\/p>\n
 sircumstances of the case and the iaw being<\/p>\n
R*=Ii TEE E-ii\ufb01\ufb01 c:<:a.?m' 5;}? KARE'-EA.'\u00a7'A\u00a7<;ZA Afr 3A\u00a3\u00a7;%Ej2i\u00a7\u00a7\ufb01A\u00a7.?I%f\u00e9%\u00a7\u00a7\u00e9;1""\u00e9\u00a7&\u00a7;\u00a7"E:\u00a7\u00a5:;\u00a7i%<\/p>\n
:5: "EHE HMS-\u00a7 <:%z.:w.:\u00a72.*:\u00b0 <:w\u00a7~" KAR.E\\i ATA.m; 9;; %\u00a7skE\\1\u20acI$~AL\u20ac3R\u00a7\u20ac '\u00ab.rx,:'m:<:;. 1936152038
\n4<\/span><\/p>\n
Said dawn by the Apex Ceurt, in hosts af judgmenta,<\/p>\n
referred above, this Cam: cannot exercise its jur\u00e9sdictian <\/p>\n
under Artio\u00e9e 227 sf Eha Qenstitut\u00e9an :31′ Snd\u00e9ag more <\/p>\n
when peti\ufb01cieners haw: got remedy under Sectir3n._”:Q6v’_{)]\u00a7. :”<\/p>\n
{he C\u00e9v\ufb01 Precedure Cede tc the  <\/p>\n
Fuxther, in Surya Dev R3955 case (as \u00e9ef\u00e9;~*r\u00a7\u00a7 sQ;=..ta},. zit’  ”<\/p>\n
is heid by the Apex C-aurt tha\ufb01ihe H:g%h%%C::g%: ‘&knk <\/p>\n
exercise of certinrar\u00e9 G?’ szipe.5rvist5fy”}L::*\u00a7$t”}\u00a7.:;ticn ivJi}i””nnt
\ncunvert itgeif Emit: a com”: en’ ‘agglpi-‘.$_a1$!f\u00bbar:d ‘\u00a5f1fdu’iTge in re-
\nappreaoiaticzn or ev\u00a7!iJ’:}gt&i$e3’d.:. hvr\ufb01uies af disscipiine an Mair pawer,<\/p>\n
 .St:par\u00a51Lis={3ry gurisdictixan may be refused to be exercised<\/p>\n
EN” THE E-HGE-E C{3{,\u00a7R”\u00a7” C}? }’\u00a7MARE*3.\u00bb%TA.KA A’? \ufb01\ufb01-.’x\u00a7(}_>5t.LC}RE 33*a’.E~*_Ne3. E %8s:i};’2\u20ac){!\u00a7\u00a7<\/p>\n
IN THE HEGH COURT *0? KARNATAKA A7? BANQEALORE W.P.N:}. 1(}86E.\/20{}\u20ac%
\n49<\/span><\/p>\n
when an alternative efficecieue remedy by way ef appeal<\/p>\n
er revieian is avaiiabie ‘:0 the parser; aggr\u00e9eved.<\/p>\n
23. Therefore, 3 am cf the ceneidered <\/p>\n
when petitioners have got eiterrzative remedy  %<\/p>\n
appee! against the erder impugned  <\/p>\n
Ceurt, 3 do not find any jueti\ufb01able -groue*dv_ee eu:::?r  3<\/p>\n
eut by petitieners to entertain the””\u00abir::ei:ent T_ feet\u00e9riien.
\nTaking into ceneideretienv erii”theee2.:_>re\u00a5’es;er\ufb01tfanfare and
\nhaving regard tn the_ faete”veridV”\u00a7e\u00a7e\u00a7 ee\u00a7\u00a7ebre ef the
\nmatter, E de  in the erder
\n\u00e9mpugnedrpeeeedyfie} ‘ Ceurt and the writ<\/p>\n
petitien \ufb02ied :by._Vepet\u00a7iVi’enie:e  i\u00e9ebie to be dismissed as<\/p>\n
:_.net_me\u00e9\ufb01ise\u00e9eebte. Renee; interference by this Court \ufb01e<\/p>\n
urree\u00e9ied’ fen.  *   ”\n<\/p>\n
 F3__\u00a3e’.po%r1t5 : Learned counsei eppeering fer<\/p>\n
*~–[7.j’jv\u00bb-peiitienere f\u00e9vehementiy submitted reiying an the<\/p>\n
 decxSeEe.ne.–‘ ef the Fur: eench reported in z.s_.R. 1992<\/p>\n
“V’}fier.._t?\u00a7.3587 and the $eemed eing\u00e9e Judge reported \u00a7n<\/p>\n
EN THE HIGH C7E3{ER.’%” E}? }<".ARNrATAI\u00a5L-r'\\ AT EANGB.L\u20ac}RE WAPNQ. i\ufb01g\u00e9i\u00e9\ufb01\ufb01\ufb02\ufb01<\/p>\n
"EN T\u00a7"{'\u00a73.M_};\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7L_3Ei Cf}UR."{ GE KARNATAKA AT I?3..:%l'~\u00a7GAi.<i}RE W.P.NCa E\ufb01\ufb01\u00e9ifl\ufb02\ufb02g
\nSi}<\/p>\n
!_LR. 2034 Kar. P1445 (airaady referred above) that<\/p>\n
since the tenabii\u00e9ty of the suit depends an the issuing of 3 <\/p>\n
notice under Sectien 125 sf the Act, the need arisese\u00abj*:a:'f"–\u00abb.V"'\u00ab__<\/p>\n
ascertain the c\u00e9mumstances in which 3 notice  <\/p>\n
mandatory and has ta be: insisted upgzrriaza.a7.ne;;\u00a7s-sary~..i'.V <\/p>\n
preiude. Whatever be the act, be it  iil\u00e9g\ufb01\ufb01'; if  <\/p>\n
reiates tn the canstitution, rnanageffzsent 0:" .\u00a5\u00a7U\u00a3i.i"':&S$'f: di'<\/p>\n
the Snciaty, 3 notice undezf  becomes ii fvcarem
\nrunner in the absence of fths;"~~.{'3'u1iiv..v;veuid be<\/p>\n
deemed. The _$\u00e9id';;1i:\u00a7'z\u00a7Vbr:ii–$s\u20ac3g}\ufb01 of th\u00e9kezarned counsm<\/p>\n
for petitiongevrsv\u00a2a'n.\u00a7%;.;:;t_E\u00e9  the raasan that, \ufb01t<\/p>\n
is crystat ci\u00e9anf 'as heig  in the case sf The<\/p>\n
z\u00e9regyagwgagar C:.\u00a2VC}-":3*,\u00a33I*r_:_\u00a7\u00a7!'V'1&fI'\\..'4V"s'-3 vi-iazzsirzg Seciety Lid. and<\/p>\n
 :AF,:\u00a7:f\u00a7ira geuda and Anofher (atready referred<\/p>\n
 ab\u00aeg)"–.,th\u00e9t,: V".pro\u00a7%'i\u00e9\u00a7an of Sectian 125 of the Act are<\/p>\n
 \u00e9a\ufb01facteu\ufb01 sivnc\u00e9fthe re\u00e9ief scuqht far by the n\u00e9aintiffs<\/p>\n
Smc\u00e9etv re\u00e9ates to the businesses of the<\/p>\n
  ___fs\u00a7ci\u00e9iv. Ami persen seeking a rei\u00e9ef ageing': the sacietv<\/p>\n
 ?\n<\/p>\n
1}\u00bb? TEE iwi\ufb01if\ufb01\ufb01 {?{,}U\ufb01T iii? KAR\u00a7”3:\u00a7TA\u00a7<IA AT BA3:\\\u00a3{"iA1.QRE "'=\u00a7v'.E'.?\\\u00a7<3.1(}8\u00e9\u00a7;-"2{){3i\u00a7<\/p>\n
EN '\u00a7H"\u00a7 5'rE1<3H \u20acL'\u00a7'j3URT Q? i\u00abi.%\u00a7RNAT,5xIi"A AT BAN\u00a33:4\\L\u20ac7JRE WM'PNe. 1686 i.f2.\u00a31Q\u00a7}
\n5}<\/p>\n
which tcsuchgs the business of tha sac.-iety, such perscm<\/p>\n
being a member 0?' na member is of no re!&va.2':.c:_'e.'__' -f: <\/p>\n
(emphasis suppi\u00e9ed)<\/p>\n
24. Themfare, 1 do not rm Z\u00e9ngi- rif}fe:t;i4I. hi<.E;1—-':{?'s&:~.. _:<\/p>\n
a:::entention's urged by Eearned ceungel fix \u00a7etit\u00a7c\u00bbh\u00e9'{s__gn <\/p>\n
the gmund that not w\u00a7ths:anding_:v:f'h\u00a5a{_'Vfagt, "\u00a7;\u00a7*\u00a7':V\u00a7?e1:BtefAivv?$he
\npiaint\u00a7ffs- petitianers am ff:#;?;1be}$ 2.1.9,; "r2\u00ae:b'\u00a5aembers ef
\nthe Society, if \u20achey_ ar__e ga\u00e9\ufb01g\ufb01lg  the
\narder which tegg\ufb01eg   ..Vbp:s;Vr\u00e9fia-\u00a3s'\u00a7<.f;_'\u00e9\u00e9anstitutmn gr
\nmanagemQr;'t'*cf.'V\u00a7\ufb01%2'  under Section
\n125 9f the   37  to note that the<\/p>\n
Trial Comft af;:5e':i=\u00a2;arefuI\u00a7yv_"-gokag thmugh the judgments<\/p>\n
\ufb01iiad u-pdnyby petit%o\u00e91\u00e9'?\u00e9 and after anaiyzing each one<\/p>\n
a? opined at paragraphs 3.5, 36 3?\n<\/p>\n
‘ “’emd 38 –*fe:;t_\u00a7a\u00e9:,__> ~  ampiy dear that w\u00e9thout \u00e9ssuing the<\/p>\n
.. j;g’;;:,*;\u00a7f3;?’\u00a5t’\u00a3?..0!’){ ..r:e*:”i;ics2 under Seci\u00e9an 125 of the Karnataka Ca-<\/p>\n
 o ‘;;;1\u00e9r=a{\u00a7ve’:”A Sac\u00e9eties Act and absence sf pieadings<\/p>\n
T #\u00e9\u00a7ar’d\u00e9ng serv\u00e9ce of natice under Section 1-25 is fata\ufb01 ta<\/p>\n
“EN THE HIGH C\u20acI3URT a::”1%;: AREQATAKA gr? EA’;=\u20acG:iE.{‘\u00a7’r:E u.=.::.:\u00ab\\n. } em-*\u00a7’E;T}\u00a7’\u00e9<\/p>\n
EN THE HKEEE QICDKEBQOF \u00a7\u00a3ARNA’\u00a7AKA AT BANGALCERE \\?{,P.?.’~Ee. EQ8t’i1f2.{)\u20ac}S
\n52<\/span><\/p>\n
the ceee of pieintiffe-eetitienere. Therefore! the Triei<\/p>\n
Ceurt came to the eeneiueien that the eieietiffe<\/p>\n
petitieeere have \ufb01ied \u20ache suit, which teaches the ‘eete\ufb01 <\/p>\n
the Ceeeperetive Seeiety with reference te its S8f2S’\u20acEf!7l.\u00a7’:’i\u00a7:’;,?=\u00a7f\u00a7’uem. Ae<\/p>\n
er bueineee ef the Society. Aeeerd\u00e9egiy, the  ‘%<\/p>\n
eiiewed the E.A.Ne_%V \ufb01\ufb01ed by reepeeebeetej~,<\/p>\n
end eeneequeeey! rejected the Veiefmt  by f&\u00a7ei’\u00a7f;s’f.\u00a7ff\u20ac_;S~ 3<\/p>\n
pe\ufb01tienere. The reeeon\u00e9ng giveeL4L’e.:;:’t%3e fer
\neilowing the epp\u00e9icet\u00e9en ene.V:”reje\u00a7et\u00a7se\u00a7. “te[ee.j3%eint \ufb01led by
\np%ein\ufb01ffe — pef\u00e9tieeere, ie after’ ‘eeifefuQjeeee\u00e9eie\u00e9ree\u00e9en of the<\/p>\n
\u00a7edgmen’se ~re!\u00a7–ee’  end further e!ee has;<\/p>\n
referred spece\ufb01eeliy ee-v__ the acts ef ple\u00e9n\ufb01ffe tench<\/p>\n
:_~’\u00a3Jp\u00abi:)\u00a7”l  Gf\u00e9hstitut%eV\ufb01’ve–e–d’ eueirzeee of the Society in as<\/p>\n
eieeh  evfjie\u00e9et\u00e9\ufb01e have eeught for the resief e\u20ac<\/p>\n
V’~=”.dee\u00a3erefeen’zegeseing the eeie deed and the reefrfieetien<\/p>\n
‘ ” ‘idem exeee\u00e9fed by the defendants 1 end 2 in fewer ef the<\/p>\n
 ‘fe.Q%:?\u00a7–eefendent end eiee the execetien of the ee\u00a3e deed<\/p>\n
  nee-\u00bbvn~ei\u00a3 ene void and e%E the%V\u00a7cte de\ufb01n\u00e9tew teach the<\/p>\n
w-……………-.–……………,<\/p>\n
EN THE HIGH COURT OF E-CARNA’\u00a3’\ufb01.KA A”? BANQALORE W.P.Ne.1G3e1!’C\u00a3\ufb01\u20ac}$<\/p>\n
1..-Emit  {:\u00e9f”‘casa$ cited by petit\u00e9anersu But<\/p>\n
EN ‘REE HEGH COURT 0?’ EQARNATAKAM A3″ EANGAIADRE ‘v’w’.P.?~3{>. 1\u20ac)3(\u00a71f2QQ,8
\n53<\/span><\/p>\n
constituticn, management and busineas 9f the Soci\u00e9ty_…__ <\/p>\n
Therefare, issuance ef acting under Sectican 125 <\/p>\n
Ca-apera\ufb01ve Suc\u00e9eties As’: was a mug: before .\u00a7;fe\u00e9t\u00a7:tL:%\u00a7:_’egT <\/p>\n
the suit. En my view, the Trig! Ca;\u00a7%\u00a7AbVh\u00a7’s <\/p>\n
ta the said conc\u00e9ua\u00e9an and uphe}d_’the 3s.–a.\u00a7\ufb01sa~ a\ufb01e\u00e9-“‘..a;\u00a7\u00a7ft\u00a7\u00e9a!’:’; <\/p>\n
anaiization of ‘the reiavant prav%\u00a7it2VV:;\u00a7”v’QfVVthei5’ ‘ a:nd. ;thV\u00a7
\njudgments cited by 333rnec3;::{gWg:\u00a7\u00a7’l”\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7%\ufb01aft\u00e9esg\ufb02 <\/p>\n
25. with regar\u00e9i ta \u00a7fhe  cited by
\nteamed s:o:.2ns\u00a7%4.f\u20ac:tE:f\u00a7  i am es’?\n<\/p>\n
the: cQnsid;e;r$,d ‘ia’.$\u00a7i}’V\u00ab:i:\u00a7\u00a7_\u00e9%, “E!-3 :vV’:’}p’:’d\u00a7spa;te or secand
\nopinion   the wet! settied
\nproposition a:f”‘iL;\u00a7;jgv  \ufb01ne Apex Caurt and thia<\/p>\n
ijnf ert{3hat&i3{;’  *-{asks and circumstances af these<\/p>\n
 *\u00bb_,_case\u00e9’ , \u00e9:’ev .”;\u00e9’\u00e9fat.\u00e9:%eiy d\u00e9\ufb01ereni: to the facts and<\/p>\n
c_\u00a7rcumsta:”*a::\u00a7s cf the case an hand and that, the same<\/p>\n
 c3:r*{na\u00a3,_.\u00a7\u00a7.e made appiicab\u00e9e to the case of patitianers.<\/p>\n
 :”\u00a7”7%;=e_..T%direct ra\ufb01ance placed b learned ceunaei fer<\/p>\n
 THE Eiiiii\ufb01 \u00ab’:T{}’i_\u00a7F;T C)? KARNATAKA RT Bz’aE*\u00bb3GA.1..\u20acI)’RE W.I3*.}~E::s.1i}$\u00a2:i1:’2{}8$<\/p>\n
mi THE HREH \u20acj'<3UR'1" Q? K;A'R';. mg::m2s1<:+s
\n:34<\/p>\n
petitioners and the Submission made by him have lzeeenl<\/p>\n
apprnpriatew and exhaustivaiy cenaidered ea refarred<\/p>\n
preceding paragraphs both by this Caurt as  '  A<\/p>\n
Tria} Cami. Further, there is rm dE$;r3u$e.reg%\u00a7\u00a7;c\u00a7_\u00a7V'z\u00a7}g{'V:v <\/p>\n
wide power that this Court has got ur.\u00a7;:i\u00a7\u00a7.–A.A_VArt\u00a7cie_..:22? aof  <\/p>\n
the Censt\u00e9tution cf \u00a3nd\u00a7a. VT'h:\u00a2\u00a7""pa%n.tv' h–e_fe'V.iS.=,  S<\/p>\n
whether this is a fit case *f\u00a7g'  ;\u00a7\u00a7ii $"C\u00aert
\nand in my view, the same4'jV:\u00a32F\u00a7:\u00a7g .AAa,'\u00bb;IEj*;\u00a7.\u00a5;'acts and
\ns\u00e9mumstances 52'   having
\nragard to the   of the case,
\ninterfergnc\u00e9   " '1'i\u00bbj'%.v=;;\u00a7fcre, gm reliance
\nplaced by  prepcs\ufb01ion (sf iaw laid
\ndawn  .\u00e9:a-'1d:; this Gear? is of rm hem ta<\/p>\n
himv in  r:\u00e9s::-Le ahhand.\n<\/p>\n
  fegard tn the faczts and circumstances<\/p>\n
~C.j’j;:\u20ac___then gsas\u00e9a\ufb02caking Ema cmnsideratien the factual and
\n‘._’_’ ‘iag::i\u00a3’_3s;;i?ej;’:ts of {he matter, as stated supra, E dn not find<\/p>\n
 merit gr 9906 grounds as such made nut by<\/p>\n
“‘_””””‘”m’_”””””I’<\/p>\n
13%  3-11:33:; C’-ma*:’?3\u00a7’K,-*s;m-:a;i’A\u00a7<_A AT BA\u00a7'3Gz%E,\u20ac3RE '+.X'.P.Ne;':. 1 \u20ac}8:i1fE(}\u00a3}8<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri Bharathi Warehousing … vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative … on 17 September, 2008 Author: N.K.Patil IN THE HKEH C.\u00a33UR”\u00a7’ OF KARN ATAEQX AT BANGALQRE W}-“.?’~\u00a70′ 10Si:3U2.\u20ac_’20S mm\u00bb mm THE 14” an op smrmmnmx, zogssk’; 1 SN ‘FHE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFQRE ms HON’BLE MR. Jusracs N.K.PATH__. M BETWEEN: ‘E […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-106292","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri Bharathi Warehousing ... vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative ... on 17 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri Bharathi Warehousing ... vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative ... on 17 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-09-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-21T05:46:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"54 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri Bharathi Warehousing … vs M\\\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative … on 17 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-21T05:46:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":10239,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Sri Bharathi Warehousing ... vs M\\\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative ... on 17 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-21T05:46:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri Bharathi Warehousing … vs M\\\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative … on 17 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sri Bharathi Warehousing ... vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative ... on 17 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri Bharathi Warehousing ... vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative ... on 17 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-21T05:46:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"54 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri Bharathi Warehousing … vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative … on 17 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-21T05:46:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008"},"wordCount":10239,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008","name":"Sri Bharathi Warehousing ... vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative ... on 17 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-21T05:46:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-bharathi-warehousing-vs-ms-shreeshyla-co-operative-on-17-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri Bharathi Warehousing … vs M\/S Shreeshyla Co-Operative … on 17 September, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/106292","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=106292"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/106292\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=106292"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=106292"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=106292"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}