Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri.Doodhganga Krishna Sahakari ... vs The Joint Registrar Of Co-Op. Societies on 11 January, 2024

Author: Hemant Chandangoudar

Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar

                                                  -1-
                                                         NC: 2024:KHC-D:722
                                                             WP No. 65666 of 2009




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                                           DHARWAD BENCH
                             DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
                                                BEFORE
                         THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 65666 OF 2009 (CS-RES)


                      BETWEEN:

                      SRI DOODHGANGA KRISHNA SAHAKARI
                      SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMITHA, CHIKODI
                      TQ: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI
SUJATA                REP. BY ITS MANAGAING DIRECTOR
SUBHASH
PAMMAR                                                                ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI SHIVARAJ BELLAKKI, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
SUJATA SUBHASH        AND:
PAMMAR
Date: 2024.01.29
01:36:48 -0800        1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF
                         CO-OP. SOCIETIES
                         (OOD) HAQ TO THE COMMISSIONER
                         FOR CANE DEVELOPMENT AND
                         DIRECTOR OF SUGAR,
                         NO.32, CRESCENT ROAD,
                         BENGALURU-560 001

                      2. SRI PARISA S/O ANNAPPA BORAGANVE
                         AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
                         OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                         R/O YEDUR, TQ: CHIKKODI,
                         DIST: BELAGAVI

                      3. ANNASAHEB S/O SREEMANTH HANJA
                         AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
                         OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                         EX-DIRECTOR OF DOODHGANGA KRISHNA
                         SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMITHA
                         CHIKODI,
                         R/O. SAUNDATTI, TQ: RAIBAGH,
                         DIST: BELAGAVI
                              -2-
                                    NC: 2024:KHC-D:722
                                      WP No. 65666 of 2009




4. SRI RAMACHANDRA S/O MALLAPPA MISHALA
   AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
   OCC: AGRICULTURE,
   R/O. DIGGEWADI, TQ: RAIBAGH,
   DIST: BELAGAVI

5. SMT. BHARATHI W/O ALAGOUDA PATIL
   AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
   OCC: AGRICULTURE
   AND HOUSEHOLD WORK,
   R/O SAUNDATTI, TQ: RAIBAGH,
   DIST: BELAGAVI.

6. SRI IRAGOUDA S/O DHULAGOUDA PATIL
   AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
   OCC: AGRICULTURE
   EX-DIRECTOR OF DOODHGANGA KRISHNA
   SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMITHA
   R/O. SAUNDATTI, TQ: RAIBAGH,
   DIST: BELAGAVI

                                              ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP.)

     THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE
IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNEXURE-A DATED 25.09.2008 PASSED BY
THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE, IN APPEAL
NOS.329 TO 333/2006, AND ETC.,.


     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                           ORDER

Respondents No. 2 to 6 raised a dispute under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, challenging the resolution passed by the petitioner expelling them as members of the Sugar Factory. Appeals were filed before the Karnataka -3- NC: 2024:KHC-D:722 WP No. 65666 of 2009 Appellate Tribunal in Appeal Nos. 329 and 333/2006, and the Tribunal, by an order dated 25.09.2008, allowed the appeals, setting aside the petitioner's expulsion order. Hence, this petition.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner society, previously registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, was registered under the Multi- State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, on 02.06.2006. Therefore, when the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act were not applicable, the appeals filed under Section 105 of the Act are not maintainable. He further argues that the private respondents failed to fulfill obligations under the petitioner sugar factory's bylaws, justifying their expulsion, and asserts that subsection (6) of Section 126 is not applicable to proceedings initiated before the Act's commencement.

3. Learned HCGP for respondent State contends that the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, considering the petitioner's appeal, Section 17(3) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, and relevant provisions, rightfully passed the impugned order, requiring no interference.

4. Considering submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, it's noted that the private respondents were members of the petitioner sugar factory registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. Bye-law No. 8 mandates members to sell sugarcane to the factory, and Bye-law No. 12 outlines reasons for expulsion, including failure to carry out -4- NC: 2024:KHC-D:722 WP No. 65666 of 2009 obligations. The petitioner, invoking Bye-law No. 12, expelled the private respondents, leading to a dispute under Section 70 of the Act.

5. The Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies dismissed the dispute, affirmed the petitioner's decision, and the private respondents appealed to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal set aside the petitioner's order, citing lack of material to substantiate expulsion and failure to provide a hearing as per Section 17(3) of the Act.

6. The petitioner's society was registered under the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, on 02.06.2006, and the cause of action and dispute arose during the applicability of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner failed to show material supporting the decision made by 3/4th members during the general meeting, violating natural justice principles.

7. The petitioner's argument that the appeal is not maintainable post-registration under the Act 2002 is rejected. Section 126(6) of the Act 2002 allows the continuation of legal proceedings initiated during the Act 1959's subsistence. Therefore, the appeal filed after the petitioner's registration under the Act 2002 is deemed maintainable. No illegality is found in the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal's order, and the writ petition stands dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE BKM, MRK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66