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 12, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mr Rekha Kannan vs State Of Karnataka on 2 May, 2025

                                            -1-
                                                         NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                                       WP No. 27821 of 2024




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MAY, 2025

                                          BEFORE

                         THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

                         WRIT PETITION NO.27821 OF 2024 (CS-RES)

                 BETWEEN:

                 1.   MR. REKHA KANNAN
                      D/O. LATE K.S. NARAYANA SWAMY,
                      AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
                      RESIDING AT FLAT NO.A-001,
                      RAMKY ONE NORTH,
                      DODDABALAPURA ROAD,
                      AVALAHALLI, YELAHANKA TALUK,
                      BENGALURU-560064.

                 2.   MS. VAISHALI PANKAJ SHARMA
                      D/O. MR. LALSHANKAR M. PUROHIT
                      AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
                      RESIDING AT FLAT NO.A-1202,
                      RAMKY ONE NORTH,
                      DODDABALAPURA ROAD,
                      AVALAHALLI, YELAHANKA TALUK,
                      BENGALURU-560064.
Digitally signed by
MAHALAKSHMI B M 3.    MS. CHITRA RAMANUJAN,
Location: HIGH        D/O. MR. V.T. NARAYANAN,
COURT OF              AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
KARNATAKA             RESIDING AT FLAT NO.A-502,
                      RAMKY ONE NORTH,
                      DODDABALAPURA ROAD,
                      AVALAHALLI, YELAHANKA TALUK,
                      BENGALURU-560064.

                 4.   MS. GARIMA PAUL
                      D/O. COL. SHIV GOVIND,
                      AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
                      RESIDING AT FLAT NO.A-504,
                      RAMKY ONE NORTH,
                      DODDABALAPURA ROAD,
                      AVALAHALLI, YELAHANKA TALUK,
                      BENGALURU-560064.
                              -2-
                                             NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                       WP No. 27821 of 2024




5.     MS. SREELAXMI JEERIGANUR
       D/O. MR. BASAVARAJAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
       RESIDING AT FLAT NO.A-1103,
       RAMKY ONE NORTH,
       DODDABALAPURA ROAD,
       AVALAHALLI, YELAHANKA TALUK,
       BENGALURU-560064.
                                                 ... PETITIONERS

(BY SMT. BEENA P.K., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
       DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
       VIKASA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
       BENGALURU-560 001.

2.     THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF
       CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES &
       APPELLATE AUTHORITY,
       III ZONE, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT,
       "SAHAKARA SOUDHA", 1ST FLOOR,
       3RD MAIN, 8TH CROSS,
       MARGOSA ROAD, MALLESHWARAM,
       BENGALURU-560003.

3.     ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF
       CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
       OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR,
       CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
       2ND FLOOR, MARGOSA ROAD,
       8TH CROSS ROAD, 3RD ZONE,
       MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560003.

4.     RAMKY ONE NORTH APARTMENT
       OWNERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,
       CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED
       UNDER THE KARNATAKA
       CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959
       HAVING OFFICE AT
       RAMKY ONE NORTH,
       DODDABALAPURA ROAD,
                               -3-
                                        NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                     WP No. 27821 of 2024




     AVALAHALLI VILLAGE, YELAHANKA HOBLI,
     BENGALURU-560064.
     REPRESENTED BY ITS
     CHIEF PROMOTER.

5.   RAMKY ESTATE & FARMS LIMITED
     COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER
     THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
     REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
     HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
     9TH FLOOR, RAMKY GRANDIOSE,
     RAMKY TOWERS COMPLEX,
     GACHIBOWLI, HYDERABAD,
     TELANGANA-500032.

     ALSO AT NO.25-30, RAMKY HOUSE
     2ND CROSS, RAGHAVENDRA NAGAR,
     KALYAN NAGAR,
     BENGALURU-560043.
                                            ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI B.S. GURUSWAMY, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3;
    DR. SUJATHA V. DURGEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-4;
    SRI PRAMOD NAIR, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR
    SRI MUDIT MUNDKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-5)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENT NO.2 DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION LETTER DATED 06.09.2024
ANNEXURE-A; QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF REGISTRATION OF
THE RESPONDENT NO.4 BEARING REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE
NO.ARB-44/REGN/21/54506/2023-24 DATED 19.10.2023 ISSUED BY
THE RESPONDENT NO.2 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETY ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.


      THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR ORDERS ON 14/03/2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM:   HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
                                     -4-
                                                    NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                                 WP No. 27821 of 2024




                         CAV O R D E R

      Petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus directing

respondent         No.2-Deputy       Registrar      of     Co-Operative

Societies (DRCS) to consider the representation dated

06.09.2024 at Annexure-A, to quash the impugned order

of Registration of respondent No.4-Ramky One North

Apartment       Owners    Co-Operative           Society    (hereinafter

referred to as 'the society' for short) and for further

reliefs.


      2.      Facts given rise to filing of this petition briefly

stated are that:

      Petitioners are owners of the apartment units in

"Ramky One North" a residential complex situated at

Avalahalli    Village,   Yelahanka         Taluk,   Bengaluru     North

having       purchased       from         respondent       No.5-Builder.

Respondent No.4-Society formed by few of the Apartment

owners of the Apartment complex of "Ramky North",

without      the   consent    of    all    the   Apartment      owners,
                                    -5-
                                                   NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                                WP No. 27821 of 2024




respondent        No.4-Society         has     been    registered     on

19.10.2023.


        3.     Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

Formation and Registration of Society is contrary to law.

She contends that under the Real Estate (Regulation and

Development) Act, 2016 ('RERA Act' for short) it was the

statutory obligation of the developer to facilitate the

Formation of the owners Association in accordance with

the      Karnataka       Apartment           Ownership       Act,   1972

(hereinafter referred to as 'KAO Act' for short). In the case

of residential Apartments, such Association must be

formed and registered as envisaged under the KAO Act.

Reliance is placed on the decision of the Division Bench of

this Court in the case of Proposed Starnest Apartment

Owners        Co-operative       Society        Ltd.   Vs.    State   of

Karnataka and others1 (Starnest Apartment), wherein it

was held that in residential Apartment projects, Formation

of an Association under the KAO Act is mandatory.


1
    W.A. NO.564/2024 D.D. 18.06.2024
                                    -6-
                                                 NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                              WP No. 27821 of 2024




Accordingly, it is submitted that the Registration of the

Society by respondent No.2 under the provisions of

Karnataka          Co-Operative          Societies   Act,     1959

('KCS Act' for short) is one without jurisdiction and

unsustainable in law.


        4.     Learned counsel appearing for the Society,

supports the averments in their statement of objections

and submits that the Registration and functioning of the

Society has been upheld by this Court in the case of Mr.

M.S. Ramanujan and others Vs. State of Karnataka

and others2, which was confirmed in the case of Mr. M.S.

Ramanujan and others Vs. State of Karnataka and

others3. It is contended that the said decision is binding

on both the petitioners and respondent No.5, as they were

parties to the earlier proceedings. It is further submitted

that petitioner Nos.3, 4 and 5 are the wives of the

petitioners in WP No.25997/2023, suppressing, concealing

and misrepresenting the earlier proceedings, the present

2
    W.P. No.25997/2023 D.D. 22.01.2024
3
    W.A. No.190/2024 D.D. 23.09.2024
                               -7-
                                               NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                         WP No. 27821 of 2024




petitioners have preferred this frivolous writ petition. It is

contended    that   except    petitioner       No.5,   the   other

petitioners are not apartment owners and thus, the

present writ petition is not maintainable.


      5.    Learned counsel for respondent No.5 submits

that the Registration of the Society under the KCS Act 'to

manage the affairs of the residential Apartment complex

and further conveying rights and interest over the lands in

favour of the cooperative Society from its lawful owners',

contradicts the purpose and provisions of KAO Act.

Learned counsel submits that the law is well settled that

for   the   management       of     Apartment     complex,    the

Registration of the Association has to be made under the

KAO Act.


      6.    Having heard the         learned    counsel for the

parties, the point that arises for consideration is:


      "When a special enactment as KAO Act provides a
      particular mode for management or regulation,
                                 -8-
                                                   NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                              WP No. 27821 of 2024




     whether can be substituted by forming a Society
     under the KCS Act?"


     7.    The petitioners are owners of their respective

apartment units in the project known as "Ramky One

North" which consists of residential units only and the

project was registered under the provisions of RERA. Prior

to the execution of the sale deeds, all the apartment

owners    had    executed   a     Deed        of     Declaration-cum-

undertaking in favour of the Builder-respondent No.5,

wherein they undertook to sign the Deed of Declaration for

the Formation of Apartment Owners Association. One such

Declaration-cum-undertaking           executed       finds     place   at

Annexure-L.      The undisputed fact is that the project

"Ramky One North" consists of residential units only.

Section 2 of KAO Act reads as under:


           "2.   Application     of     the        Act.-This    Act
     applies only to property the sole owner or all of the
     owners of which submit the same to the provisions
     of this Act by duly executing and registering a
     Declaration as hereinafter provided:
                                  -9-
                                                NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                            WP No. 27821 of 2024




             Provided that, no property shall be submitted
     to the provisions of this Act, unless it is mainly
     used, or proposed to be used for residential
     purposes."
                                                (Emphasis supplied)

     8.    Section 3(d) defines 'Association of Apartment

Owners' which reads as under:


             "3.    Definitions.-In this Act, unless the
     context otherwise requires.-


     (d)   "Association      of        Apartment    Owners"
     means all of the apartment owners acting as a
     group     in   accordance    with    the   bye-laws   and
     Declaration.


     9.    Section 3(i) defines 'Competent Authority'

which reads as under:

     (i)   "Competent authority" means in relation to
     building constructed or to be constructed by the
     Housing Board, the Secretary of the Housing Board
     and in any other case, the Registrar of Co-operative
     Societies as defined in the Karnataka Co-operative
     Societies Act, 1959;
                                          (emphasis supplied)
                             - 10 -
                                         NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                      WP No. 27821 of 2024




     10.   Section 5 of the KAO Act deals with Ownership

of Apartments, which reads as under:


           "5. Ownership of apartments.-(1) Each
     apartment owner shall be entitled to the exclusive
     ownership and possession of his apartment.


           (2) Each apartment owner shall execute a
     Declaration that he submits his apartment to the
     provisions of this Act and a Deed of Apartment in
     relation to his apartment in the manner prescribed
     for the purpose."


     11.   Section   5   emphasizes    that   each   of   the

apartment owner shall be entitled for exclusive ownership

and possession of his apartment.        Sub-clause (2) of

Section 5 states that each apartment owner shall execute

a Declaration that he submits his Apartment to the

provisions of this Act and a Deed of Apartment in relation

to his Apartment in the manner prescribed for the

purpose.


     12.   The KAO Act makes it clear that if the property

is used or proposed to be used for residential purposes,
                                   - 11 -
                                                NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                             WP No. 27821 of 2024




KAO Act is applicable. As could be seen from the records

that the sale deeds indicate that the entire project is for

residential and no part of project is used or intended to be

used towards commercial.               The Deed of Declaration is

executed by the Apartment owners for Formation of the

Apartment owners Association.


        13.    The law is well settled and no more a res

integra that the Association of the owners of flats situated

in an Apartment, consisting of residential units only, there

is a specific enactment under the KAO Act, and the

Registration of the Association has to be made under the

KAO Act and not under the provisions of the KCS Act. The

Division Bench in the case of VDB Celadon Apartment

Owners Association vs. Mr. Praveen Prakash and

others4 (VDB Celadon) at paragraph Nos.6 to 11 has held

as under:

        "6. Section 3 of the said Act of 1960 reads thus:

            3. Societies to which the Act applies.-



4
    W.A. No.974/2019 D.D. 06.11.2019
                                   - 12 -
                                                       NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                                  WP No. 27821 of 2024




The following societies may be registered
under this Act,--


Societies established for,--
(a)   the promotion of charity;
(b)   the promotion of education, science,
      literature, or the fine arts;
(c)   the promotion of sports;
(d)   the instruction and the diffusion of
      knowledge relating to commerce or
      industry          or        of        any    other     useful
      knowledge;
(e)   the diffusion of political education;
(f)   the    foundation                 or    maintenance        of
      libraries or reading rooms for general
      use among the members or open to the
      public,      or        of     public        museums      and
      galleries of painting and other works of
      art;
[(ff) the    promotion                 of    conservation      and
      proper use of natural resources and
      scarce Infrastructural facilities like land,
      power, water, forest and such other
      resources and infrastructural facilities,
      as     may        be        notified        by   the   State
      Government from time to time.
                            - 13 -
                                             NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                        WP No. 27821 of 2024




  (g)     the   collection     of    natural    history,
          mechanical and philosophical inventions
          Or designs and
          Which intend to apply their profits, if
          any, or other income in promoting their
          objects and prohibit the payment of any
          dividend or distribution of any income
          or profits among their members."


Even according to the case of the appellant, the
dominant object for the formation of the appellant
Association is to administer, maintain and run the
building and apartments. Clauses 5.1 and 5.2 are,
even according to the learned counsel for the
appellant, the dominant objects of the Association,
and they read thus:


    5.1     To administer, maintain and run the
    building and apartments known as VDB
    Celadon No.23/3, 23/4, 26/1, Shivanahalli
    Hobli, Jakkur Road, Yelahanka, Bangalore
    - 560064.


    5.2     To Carry on the Day-to-day work
    relating to all aspects of the building,
    apartments,     common          areas,     common
    facilities and common services therein;
                                - 14 -
                                                  NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                                WP No. 27821 of 2024




7.    On a plain reading of Section 3 of the said Act
of 1960, it is clear that the object of administering,
maintaining        and      running       the    buildings   and
apartments and to carry on the day-to-day work
relating      to      all      the        aspects      of    the
buildings/apartments, common areas and common
facilities will not be covered by any of the clauses
(a) to (g) of Section 3 of the said Act of 1960. Even
according to the case of the appellant, Clauses 5.1
and 5.2 are its dominant objects. In fact, on the
earlier date, we had granted time to the appellant
to take instructions whether it proposes to apply for
deletion of certain objects which are a part of the
bye-laws of the appellant Association.


8.    Today, the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant, on instructions, states that if the said two
objects are deleted, the registration of the appellant
under the said Act of 1960 cannot be maintained.


9.    Thus, the main object of the appellant was to
do something wherein could have been done by an
Association        formed     in        accordance    with   the
provisions of the said Act of 1972. In fact, the
documents of sale executed by the developer in
respect of the flat/apartment contain a stipulation
that the purchasers of the flats shall form an
Association/Society/Condominium                  in   accordance
with the provisions of the said Act of 1972. That is
                               - 15 -
                                               NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                           WP No. 27821 of 2024




    how the learned Single Judge by modifying the
    impugned order dated 15th February, 2019, has
    clarified that steps can be taken to register the
    appellant Association under the provisions of the
    said Act of 1972.


    10.   Thus, after having perused the dominant
    objects of the appellant Association, we find that
    the said objects are not covered by Section 3 of the
    said Act of 1960, and therefore, the appellant could
    not have been registered under the said Act. We
    find no error in the view taken by the learned
    Single Judge when he had proceeded to cancel
    registration of the appellant.


    11.   As observed by the learned Single Judge, the
    impugned order as well as this order will not
    prevent the persons who are members of the
    appellant   Association        from   taking   steps   for
    formation        and       registration        of      an
    Association/Condominium under the provisions of
    the said Act of 1972 inasmuch as the sale deeds
    executed    in   favour   of    the   apartment     owners
    contemplate formation of such Association."


    14.   The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case

of Shantharam Prabhu and others Vs. K. Dayanand
                                      - 16 -
                                                        NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                                    WP No. 27821 of 2024




Rai and others5 (Shantharam Prabhu), has held at

paragraph No.23 as under:


      "23.   To Summarise:

        23.1. KAOA would only apply to an apartment where
        it is used for residential purposes. A flat or an
        apartment which is used for an office or showroom
        or shop or godown (and includes garage) cannot be
        subjected to KAOA and would always continue to be
        governed by KOFA.


        23.2. When     an   apartment         is    proposed    to   be
        constructed or under construction and agreements
        are entered into, KOFA would apply insofar as the
        relationship and/or dispute between the purchaser
        and the Promoter.


        23.3. KOFA     would    continue           to   apply   if   the
        Apartment is not subjected to KAOA as afore
        detailed.


        23.4. Once an apartment is subjected to KAOA,
        KOFA would cease to apply and it is only the KAOA,
        Declaration, Deed of Apartment and bye-laws which
        would be applicable.




5
    CRP No.96/2021 D.D. 08.09.2021
                            - 17 -
                                              NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                          WP No. 27821 of 2024




23.5. In the event of an apartment being removed
from the provisions of KAOA in terms of Section 14
of KAOA, KOFA would come into operation.


23.6. Essentially     KAOA,         Declaration,   Deed     of
Apartment and bye-laws would be the provisions
under which the relationship between an apartment
owner and Association of the Apartment, building,
property, which would be governed.


23.7. KOFA would apply insofar as the relationship
and/or   dispute      between       the   purchaser   of    an
apartment and Promoter and any defaults on part of
the Promoter. The other enactments like RERA
would also be applicable.


23.8. Even when an Apartment is not subjected to
KAOA and KOFA applies, the dispute and the
relationship between the apartment owner and the
Association would be governed in terms of the rules
and regulations under the Co-operative Society
under which the said Association is registered or the
terms of articles and memorandum of Association of
company       under   which   the      said   Association   is
registered.


23.9. If the Association is formed under KOFA,
registration of the Association would be required
under    the     Karnataka          Co-operative   Societies
                                - 18 -
                                                  NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                               WP No. 27821 of 2024




Registration     Act    and/or          the     Companies     Act
depending on whether it is a Co-operative Society or
a Company which is to be registered.


23.10.   In    the     event     of     a     declaration,   Deed
Apartment and byelaws being executed and the
Apartment, building, property is subjected to KAOA,
the said documents would have to be registered
before the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar and the same
be informed to the Registrar of the Co-operative
Societies.


23.11.   There       would      be      no     requirement    for
registration of the Declaration, Deed of Apartment
and/or bye-laws with the Registrar of the Co-
operative Societies.


23.12. If the property is subjected to KAOA, the
proceedings if any would have to be filed before the
Civil Court of competent jurisdiction.


23.13. If a Co-operative Society or a Company is
formed to manage the property, and the provision
of KOFA being applicable the proceedings would
have to be filed in terms of Section 13(5) before a
Small Causes Court where a Small Causes Court is
established, in the absence thereof, before a Civil
Court of competent jurisdiction.
                                      - 19 -
                                                         NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                                    WP No. 27821 of 2024




    23.14. All the apartment owners are not required to
    sign     and        execute     the       Declaration,    Deed     of
    Apartment and bye-laws. The                     Promoter       before
    registration of a sale deed can execute and register
    the Declaration, Deed of Apartment and bye-laws
    with the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar being the owner
    of the Apartment, building and property. If there is
    a joint development agreement, the owner of the
    property would also have to join the execution of
    the registration of the above documents. Suffice it
    to say, it is only the persons or entities who have
    registered title in respect of the property who are
    required       to     execute     and       register     the   above
    documents.


    23.15.     On       the   purchase        of   the   property    and
    registration of the sale deed, the purchaser or
    apartment taker would have to execute necessary
    Declaration under Form B of KAOR agreeing to be
    bound by the said Declaration, Deed of Apartment
    and bye-laws. The Association when formed could
    always amend the same in terms of the provisions
    applicable thereto."


    15.    The Division Bench of this Court in the case of

Proposed Starnest Apartment Owners Co-Operative
                                          - 20 -
                                                              NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                                         WP No. 27821 of 2024




Society       Ltd.,    Vs.     State         of        Karnataka6      (Proposed

Starnest) has held at paragraph Nos.16 to 18 as under:


               "16. The narrow dispute in the present appeal
        is, whether association is to be formed under the
        Act of 1972 or Co-operative Society, is to be formed
        under the KOF Act, 1972.


               17. It is seen from the record that the sale
        deeds would indicate the entire project is for
        residential and no part of the project is used or
        intended to be used towards commercial purpose.
        That apart, the parties in the sale deed have agreed
        to   abide    by     the   provisions           of   the   Karnataka
        Apartment Ownership Act, 1972, and to form an
        Association.


               18. The contention of learned counsel for the
        appellant     that    in   view           of   the   project   being
        registered     under       the     provisions         of   RERA   in
        compliance of Section 11(4)(e), (f), (g) of RERA, a
        Co-operative Society is to be formed, is not
        acceptable. The said provisions of RERA would
        mandate       the    builder       to      enable     formation   of
        Association or Society or Co-operative Society, as
        the case may be, of the allottees. As the project
        under consideration consists only residential units,

6
    W.A. No.564/2024 D.D. 18.06.2024
                             - 21 -
                                          NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                       WP No. 27821 of 2024




     the said provisions only mandate formation of
     association of the allottees under the applicable
     laws. The law applicable in the present case is the
     Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, 1972."


     16.   Thus, in light of the law declared by the Co-

Ordinate Bench of this Court and upheld by the Division

Bench referred supra, cannot hold the Court for long to

arrive at a conclusion that the petitioners are members of

respondent No.4-Society are entitled to have Registration

of an Apartment Owners Association under the KAO Act

and there cannot be any Association registered under the

KCS Act.


     17.   Another contention of counsel appearing for the

Society is that 'Society Formation' has been upheld in WA

No.190/2024 and thus, the same is binding on the

petitioners. The challenge in W.P. No.25997/2023 by the

husband of the petitioners was against the public notice

issued by the Returning Officer under Rule 14 (3) of

Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Rules, 1960, the Co-
                                  - 22 -
                                                   NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                               WP No. 27821 of 2024




Ordinate Bench of this Court dismissed the writ petition

with the following observations:


     "14. Accordingly, the Writ petition is dismissed.

     15.   Respondent No.5 shall issue fresh calendar
           of events to hold elections to the Board of
           6th respondent-Society.


     16.   Notwithstanding the dismissal of the Writ
           Petition, in case the petitioners are able to
           establish that their applications have been
           rejected or not accepted by the authority,
           the petitioners are at liberty to avail such
           statutory    remedy        before     the    Appellate
           Authority. If such an appeal is filed, the
           same shall be decided in accordance with
           law     without     being       influenced    by   the
           observations made in this Writ Petition.


     17.   This Court has not expressed anything on
           the     merits of    the       claim made by       the
           petitioners to be the members of the 6th
           respondent Society. This Court has only
           examined whether the notification dated
           07.11.2023 is to be quashed at this stage or
           not."
                             - 23 -
                                         NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                      WP No. 27821 of 2024




     18.   W.A. No.190/2024 preferred by the petitioners

therein came to be confirmed holding that the Board of the

Co-Operative    Society-respondent    No.4   has    become

functional. It is pertinent to note that the challenge in WP

No.25997/2023 was only to the calendar of events for

conducting the elections and in the said petition, there was

no challenge to the validity of the Formation of a Co-

operative Society-respondent No.4 for the purpose to

manage and maintain the Apartment Complex. This being

so, the contention raised by respondent No.4 that the

present writ petition needs to be dismissed on the ground

that the earlier findings in writ petition confirmed in writ

appeal are binding on the petitioners is unsustainable.


     19.   For the foregoing reasons, the point framed for

consideration is answered holding that the Association has

to be formed by the Builder under the KAO Act and the

Society formed under the KCS Act is not sustainable and

this Court pass the following:
                                - 24 -
                                             NC: 2025:KHC:18150
                                           WP No. 27821 of 2024




                              ORDER

I. Writ petition is allowed. II. The impugned order registering the Society under the KCS Act dated 19.10.2023 issued by respondent No.2-ARCS is hereby set aside. III. Respondent No.5-Builder is directed to comply with all the requirements under the law and form an Association of Apartment Owners under the KAO Act and the members of respondent No.4- Society to cooperate in forming an Association for the project known as "Ramky North".

Sd/-

_____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1