IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 03RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT WRIT APPEAL NOs.1023-1028 OF 2016 (CS-RES) BETWEEN:
1. KARNATAKA STATE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ASSOCIATION, BENGALURU NO.7/8, 2ND FLOOR SHOUKATH BUILDING SJP ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 002 NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI. T.M. DILEEP KUMAR.
2. SRI. RAVEENDRA S. KORE SON OF SANGAPPA KORE AGED 36 YEARS RESIDING AT FLAT NO.203 1ST FLOOR, MARUTHI ENCLAVE SY NO.205/94/2, BALAJI LAYOUT MALLATHAHALLI, NAGARABHAVI BENGALURU - 560 056.
3. SMT. TARA BEVINJE DAUGHTER OF B. S. KAKKILLAYA AGED 58 YEARS RESIDING AT FLAT NO.T 8 AND 9 SRIVARTHE PRASIDDI APARTMENTS BIKASIPURA MAIN ROAD YELACHENAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 062.
4. SRI. H. M. BASAVARAJA SON OF H. M. PANCHAKSHARAIAH AGED 59 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1287/68 4TH CROSS, ASHOKANAGAR BSK I STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 050.
5. SRI. B. V. MADDANASWAMY SON OF B. M. VRUSHABHENDRAPPA AGED 60 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.145, 10TH MAIN BCC LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR BENGALURU – 560 040.
6. SRI. SATHISHA. R SON OF LATE RAJANNA AGED 38 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.277, HASITAT HOUSE UNIT 201, 1ST FLOOR 1ST MAIN, CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU – 560 018.
... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. M.V. SESHACHALA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. ARAVIND V. CHARAN, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION VI FLOOR, M. S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.
(REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY) 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS M. S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD VASANTHNAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052.
4. THE DIRECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE AUDIT KARNATAKA NO.17 JAYANIVAS, SHANKARMUTT ROAD BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU - 560 004.
5. KARNATAKA STATE COST ACCOUNTANTS ASSOCIATION, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MR. VISHWANATH BHAT.
6. SURESH R. GUNJALLI COST ACCOUNTANT NO.10, 1ST FLOOR VINAYAKA APARTMENTS VINAYAKA LAYOUT BASAVESHWARANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 079.
7. GIRISH. K COST ACCOUNTANT NO.36, CHATURA HOMES 2ND MAIN, MEENAKSHINAGAR NEAR KRISHNA KALYANA MANTAPA BASAVESHWARANAGARA BENGALURU - 560 079.
8. B. JAYENDRA NAIK COST ACCOUNTANT NO.101, SIRI MEADOWS APARTMENTS II MAIN, II STAGE VASANTHA VALLABHA NAGAR VASANTHAPURA BENGALURU - 560 061.
9. HARI T. DEVADIGA COST ACCOUNTANT NO.28, OLD NO. 40, 1ST FLOOR BETWEEN 3RD AND 4TH CROSS 2ND MAIN ROAD, CHAMARAJAPET BENGALURU - 560 018.
10. T.K. JAGANNATHAN COST ACCOUNTANT NO.50, 5TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU - 560 018.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.LAXMINARAYANA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT 1 TO 4;
SRI. UDAYA HOLLA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT-5 TO 10;
SRI. S.S. NAGANAND, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. S.SRIRANGA, ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT) THESE APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION 2026- 31 OF 2015 DATED 29/03/2016.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT I.A.1 of 2019 is an application filed by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India seeking to implead themselves as a respondent to assist the Court.
2. Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge in dismissing the writ petition, the petitioners therein have filed this appeal.
3. Sri M.V. Seshachala, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the order of the learned Single Judge is erroneous and interference is called for. That the learned Single Judge did not consider the contentions of the petitioners and has accordingly come to an erroneous conclusion.
4. The same is disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents.
5. Sri Naganand, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the counsel representing the applicant submits that the amendment sought to be brought is erroneous.
6. However, on hearing learned counsels, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. The very question of law was challenged in yet another Writ Petition No.76464 of 2013. Vide order dated 9.7.2013, the writ petition filed by the first petitioner herein was dismissed. The same was challenged in Writ Appeal No.31061 of 2013 before the Division Bench. By the order dated 30.10.2013, the appeal was dismissed confirming the order of the learned Single Judge. There are no further proceedings. It is that very writ petitioner who has filed the instant appeal. Since the question of law has since been answered in the aforesaid writ appeal, we do not find it necessary to advert to the contentions canvassed.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The application in I.A.1 of 2019 also stands dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE nv