Dismissed

T.K.Hameed v. Sales Officer, Palakkad Dist.Co.Op.Bank

Kerala HC13 Oct 2008WP(C)/13028/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the complaint regarding the improper crediting of remitted amounts during the execution of an arbitration award is within the jurisdiction of the Sale Officer, not the writ court. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed without prejudice to the petitioner's right to object to credit disputes before the Sale Officer.

T.K.Hameed Vs Sales Officer, Palakkad… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2008 / 21ST ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 13028 of 2008(A) --------------------------

¶5

PETITIONER(S): ---------------

¶6

T.K.HAMEED, THONIKADAVIL HOUSE, SHORANUR-2.

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.V.G.SANKARAN

¶8

RESPONDENT(S): ---------------

¶9

THE SALES OFFICER, PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, PALAKKAD. 2. PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PALAKKAD. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.M.MONAYE SRI.M.PAUL VARGHESE

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

APPENDIX IN WPC.13028/08

¶12

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶13

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE BANK DATED 30.4.07.

¶14

EXT.P1(a): TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE BANK DATED 31.5.07.

¶15

EXT.P1(b): TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE BANK DATED 30.6.07.

¶16

EXT.P1(c): TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE BANK DATED 31.7.07.

¶17

EXT.P1(d): TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE BANK DATED 31.8.07.

¶18

EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PASS BOOK ISSUED ONE TIME SETTLEMENT.

¶19

EXT.P2(a): TRUE COPY OF THE PASS BOOK ISSUED ONE TIME SETTLEMENT.

¶20

EXT.P2(b): TRUE COPY OF THE PASS BOOK ISSUED ONE TIME SETTLEMENT.

¶21

EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND respondent DATED 7.4.08.

¶22

EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE petitioner BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATD 8.4.2008.

¶23

/TRUE COPY/

¶24

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

¶25

W.P(C).No.13028 OF 2008

¶26

¶27

Dated this the 13^th day of October, 2008

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Petitioner availed a loan from the second respondent and

¶30

defaulted repayment. That resulted in an arbitration award under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 and consequential recovery proceedings. There is no jurisdictional error or legal infirmity in those proceedings. The complaint of the petitioner is only that certain amounts remitted were not appropriately credited. Taking into consideration such submission and having regard to the total amounts outstanding, an interim order was issued on 11.4.2008, requiring the petitioner to remit amounts at the rate of Rs.20,000/-. He remitted three instalments and defaulted thereafter. Any dispute regarding the due credit of amounts already paid is a matter that can be raised before the Sale Officer who is executing the award. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to state any objection regarding the remaining outstandings before the Sale Officer.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge

¶33

kkb.

T.K.Hameed v. Sales Officer, Palakkad Dist.Co.Op.Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.K.Hameed v. Sales Officer, Palakkad Dist.Co.Op.Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Josekutty V.J Vs K.P.S.C

Jacob Manuel Vs the Tamilnadu Merchantile Bank Ltd.

Delson P.Davis Vs Trichur District Co=-Op. Hospital

E.P.Gopinathan Vs Tom Jose and Another

P.v.Annakutty Vs Special Sale Officer

K.K.Poulose Vs Mary Mathew & Another.