(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, Order, or direction quashing impugned order dated 12.11.2024 passed by Respondent No.3 in ABN ward in Bearing No. at Annexure-E, insofar as petitioners are concerned & etc.)

Oral Order

1. Seeking for following relief, this writ petition is filed.

          (i) Issue a WRIT OF CERTIORARI or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing impugned order dated 12.11.2024 passed by respondent no.3 in ABN ward in bearing no. at Annexure-'E', insofar as petitioners are concerned.

          (ii) Issue a WRIT OF CERTIORARI or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing impugned auction notice dated on 04.04.2026 issued by Respondent no.1 bearing no. at Annexure-F. In so far as petitioner are concerned.

          (iii) Pass such other orders as this Hon'ble court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity.

2. Sri Prakash S Gudihindin, learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners are wife and children of Sadhanand Modi who died on 27.07.2020. It was submitted that during his lifetime in 2019, Sadanand Modi had obtained financial assistance from respondent no.2 to tune of Rs.10,00,000/- on an annual interest of 15% per annum, and towards security of said loan, pledged properties no.150100600100110392 and 150100600100120736 measuring 134.90 and 54.10 square meters situated at Lokapur village of Mudhol Taluk. In view of default in repayment schedule, respondent no.2 initiated recovery proceedings and obtained an award. In meanwhile, petitioners filed OS no.163/2024 before Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudhol for partition and separate possession of properties including pledged properties. Since mortgaged properties were embroiled in litigation, and Civil Court had granted an interim order of temporary injunction against alienation of said properties, steps by respondent no.2 - Bank for auction sale of properties by issuing notice at Annexure-F and arbitration award at Annexures-E were illegal, especially after respondent no.2 - Bank had impleaded itself as party in pending suit. On said grounds sought for allowing writ petition by quashing arbitration award and auction notice.

3. On other hand, Smt.Nandini B.Somapur, learned AGA appearing for respondents no.1 and 3 on advance notice of opposed writ petition. She submitted that impugned award was passed under Section 70 of Karnataka State Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 ('Act', for short) was appealable under Section 105 of Act. Writ petition filed without exhausting efficacious and alternative remedy would not be tenable. Besides challenge against auction notice, would also not tenable, as obtaining of loan, pledging of properties and default in repayment were not disputed.

4. Heard learned counsel and perused material on record.

5. From above, it is seen that petitioners legal representatives of debtor have filed this writ petition challenging award passed under Section 70 of Act, and auction notice issued in pursuance of same. At outset and as rightly submitted by learned AGA, impugned award at Annexure-E would be appealable. Writ petition is filed without exhausting efficacious and alternative remedy. It is further seen that petitioners have appeared in arbitration proceedings, engaged counsel, sought time to file objections and thereafter appeared to have filed civil suit and obtained injunction. Since petitioners have participated in arbitration proceedings and same has ended in an award passed on 12.11.2024, challenge against mere auction notice issued on 04.04.2026 in pursuance of award without challenging award before appropriate authority would reek of abuse of process of law and lack of bonafide.

6. Therefore, writ petition is dismissed on ground of non-exhaustion of efficacious and alternative remedy.