Karnataka High Court
The Dhanashree Co-Op. Bank Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:6127
WP No. 105475 of 2016
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO.105475 OF 2016 (CS-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. THE DHANASHREE CO-OP. BANK LTD.,
ATHANI, NEAR OLD T.M.C.,
ATHANI-591304, DIST: BELAGAVI.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,
SRI. NARASIMHA S/O. KRISHNAJI KULKARNI,
AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE.
2. DHANASHREE CO-OP. BANK LTD.,
ATHANI, NEAR OLD T.M.C.,
ATHANI-591304, DIST: BELAGAVI,
REPRESENTED BY ITS THE CHAIRMAN,
SRI. RAMESH S/O. HARISHCHANDRA BHAT,
AGE. 74 YEARS, OCC. AGRIL.,
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. SURABHI KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
MOHANKUMAR
B SHELAR REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
Location: HIGH DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION,
COURT OF M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU.
KARNATAKA
2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
BELAGAVI DIVISION, SAHAKARI ADALITA BHAVAN,
2ND FLOOR, OPP. K.H.B HERITAGE, JEKKERI HONDA,
NEAR RAILWAY STATION, BELAGAVI.
3. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
BELAGAVI DISTRICT, SAHAKARI ADALITA BHAVAN,
OPP. K.H.B HERITAGE, JEKKERI HONDA,
NEAR RAILWAY STATION, BELAGAVI.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:6127
WP No. 105475 of 2016
HC-KAR
4. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
CHIKODI SUB-DIVISION, CHIKODI.
5. THE CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT,
OLD TAHASILDAR OFFICE, ATHANI,
TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
6. SHRI. DIPAK @ DEEPAK @ VAMAN
S/O. PANDURANG PATIL,
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. CTS NO.1299/B, MAIN ROAD,
ATHANI, PIN NO-591304.
7. SMT. VANISHREE W/O. KIRAN PATIL,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O. HABBU GALLI, ATHANI,
TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
8. SHRI. VIRAJ S/O. KIRAN PATIL,
AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O. HABBU GALLI, ATHANI,
TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R.PATIL, HCGP FOR R1-R5;
SRI. SANJAY S.KATAGERI, ADVOCATE FOR R6;
NOTICE TO R7 AND R8 ARE SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE
ACTION OF THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AS PER THE NOTICE BEARING
NO.DRL/MKT/P-38/2014-15 DATED 30.06.2016, ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.3, PRODUCED AS PER ANNEXURE-A. B. ISSUE A
WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 5 TO NOT TO DISCLOSE THE
DETAILS AND INFORMATION OF THE BANK ACCOUNT HOLDERS TO
ANY 3RD PARTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC.,.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:6127
WP No. 105475 of 2016
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This writ petition is filed seeking for a direction, quashing the action of respondent No.3 as per the notice dated 30.06.2016 issued by respondent No.3 and sought for a mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 to 5 not to disclose the details and information of the bank account holders to any third parties, in accordance with law.
2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows.
3. The petitioner society was a registered society under Section 4 the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1959' for short). Thereafter, Reserve Bank of India granted a licence to carry on a banking business to the petitioner society. The late Kiran Pandurang Patil obtained financial assistance from the petitioner society after due verification and based on the work order so also the immovable properties held by him. Respondent No.6 claims to be the owner raised a dispute -4- NC: 2026:KHC-D:6127 WP No. 105475 of 2016 HC-KAR before the Joint Register of Co-operative Societies (JRCS) in 2006, and the said dispute came to be dismissed vide order dated 31.10.2006. The encumbrance made on the joint family property of late Kiran Patil, and respondent No.6 in respect of CTS No.1299/B was removed by effecting necessary entries. Thereafter, respondent No.6 filed a private complaint in P.C.No.54/2007. Meanwhile, Kiran Patil expired on 15.02.2013. Further, wife of Kiran Patil, i.e., respondent No.7 submitted an application to the petitioner society seeking information regarding the loan obtained by the late Kiran Patil with an intention to clear the entire dues in view of inter-se dispute between the family members. Respondent No.6 Dipak Patil, the brother of Kiran Patil submitted an application seeking the details pertaining to the account and other information of Kiran Patil. The petitioner society did not furnish the account details. Dipak Patil approached the JRCS, Belagavi raising a complaint. In reply, the authority has made it clear that there is no encumbrance of whatsoever nature in respect of loan -5- NC: 2026:KHC-D:6127 WP No. 105475 of 2016 HC-KAR obtained by Kiran Patil on CTS Nos.1299/B, 1937/A, 1957, and 1959. Further, JRCS visited the petitioner society and inspected the records and found that there are no encumbrances on the joint family property as stated by the petitioner society. Thereafter, Dipak Patil submitted a complaint to the Reserve Bank of India and ARCS, alleging that the petitioner society gave a false fabricated report. The District Register of Co-operative Societies (DRCS) decided to hold an enquiry under Section 65 of the Act of 1959, and appointed a Co-operative Development Officer as Enquiry Officer. Accordingly, conducted an enquiry, and submitted a report stating that there are violations of RBI norms. The JRCS sent a communication to the petitioner society with reference to the complaint dated 27.05.2016 by Dipak Patil, and requested to furnish the documents. The petitioner society, aggrieved by the notice, filed this writ petition.
4. The respondent-State has filed objections contending that the writ petition filed by the petitioner -6- NC: 2026:KHC-D:6127 WP No. 105475 of 2016 HC-KAR society is not maintainable and contented that the petitioner society has not furnished the details as sought by respondent Nos.2 to 5. Hence, respondent No.1 has issued the impugned notice. Hence, the writ petition filed by the petitioner society is not maintainable, and prays to dismiss the writ petition.
5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner society, learned HCGP, and the learned counsel for respondent No.6.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner society submits that pursuant to the impugned notice, the petitioner society has already furnished the information as sought by respondent Nos.2 to 5 vide Annexure-F. She submitted that the petitioner society has already complied with the directions issued in the notice. Hence, she prays to set aside the impugned notice.
7. Per contra, learned HCGP submits that pursuant to the notice issued to the petitioner society, the petitioner -7- NC: 2026:KHC-D:6127 WP No. 105475 of 2016 HC-KAR society has furnished the information as sought by respondent Nos.2 to 5 vide Annexure-F.
8. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 submits that though the petitioner society has furnished the information as sought by respondent No.6, but there is no seal on Annexure-F. He submits that if the petitioner society affixes a seal on Annexure-F, the grievance of respondent No.6 will be complied with. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dispose of the petition.
9. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
10. It is an undisputed fact that respondent Nos.6 to 8 have sought information from the petitioner society regarding the family properties. They have sought information that the deceased Kiran Patil has mortgaged any of the joint family properties of Kiran Patil, and respondent Nos.6 to 8. The petitioner society initially did not furnish the information as sought by Nos.6 to 8. They approached the JRCS and lodged a complaint, and -8- NC: 2026:KHC-D:6127 WP No. 105475 of 2016 HC-KAR thereafter an enquiry was held under Section 64 of the Act of 1959. The Enquiry Officer submitted a report stating that the allegations made against the petitioner society are not proved. The Dipak Patil submitted another complaint to furnish the details pertaining to the documents making allegation that there is violation of the RBI norms vide Annexure-Q. On the basis of Annexure-Q, the JRCS sent a communication along with the complaint, and requested the petitioner society to furnish the documents pertaining to the loan transaction and enquiry report under Section 65 of the Act of 1959. The DRCS sent a communication to the petitioner society to furnish the documents as per the complaint dated 27.05.2016 by Dipak Patil. Though petitioner society has submitted a reply vide communication dated 07.06.2016 and 13.06.2016 to the JRCS and the DRCS vide Annexures-Q3 and Q4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 submits that Annexure-F do not bear the seal of the petitioner society. Learned counsel for the petitioner society submits that the petitioner society -9- NC: 2026:KHC-D:6127 WP No. 105475 of 2016 HC-KAR will affix the seal on Annexure-F and also on Annexures-Q1 and Q2, and will furnish all the details pertaining to the documents and information sought, within a reasonable time. As the petitioner society has agreed to furnish the documents and information sought by respondent Nos.2 to 5 and Dipak Patil, the impugned notice is liable to be set aside. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) The writ petition is allowed.
ii) The impugned notice is hereby quashed. The Petitioner society is directed to issue Annexures-
F, Q3 and Q4, and affix the seal on the Annexures-F, Q3 and Q4 within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE MBS CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11