Dismissed

Kochurani Antony v. Senior Regional Manager

Kerala HC1 Jul 2016WP(C)/8253/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the respondent's suspension of refill supplies. Observing an arbitration clause in the dealership agreement and noting that termination proceedings were not challenged, the Court closed the writ, leaving the matter open for appropriate proceedings. No specific questions were directly answered.

What did the court decide?

None granted; the writ petition is closed with leave to challenge termination proceedings separately.

Kochurani Antony Vs Senior Regional Manager — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2016/10TH ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 8253 of 2006 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

KOCHURANI ANTONY, PROPRIETRESS, ANNAS GAS AGENCY, HP DEALER, NEAR PADIVATTOM BUS STOP, EDAPPALLY.P.O, KOCHI-24.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.C.PETER

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

THE SENIOR REGIONAL MANAGER, PALGHAT REGIONAL OFFICE, L.P.G.DIVISION, HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION, LTD., KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD.

¶11

R BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

¶14

WP(C).No. 8253 of 2006 (G)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶17

EXT.P1: LETTER OF APPOINTMENT DATED 26.02.1996. EXT.P2: SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 14TH JULY, 2005.

¶18

EXT.P3: REPLY TO SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 14TH JULY, 2005.

¶19

EXT.P4: SUSPENSION ORDER -REG REFILL SALES DATED, 22ND AUGUST 2005.

¶20

EXT.P5: REPLY TO SUSPENSION ORDER - REG.REFILL SALES DATED 22ND AUGUST 2005.

¶21

EXT.P6: SHOW CAUSE NOTICE FOR TERMINATION DATED 9TH NOVEMBER, 2005.

¶22

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

P.V.ASHA, J.

W.P.(C).No.8253 of 2006

¶28

Dated this the 1^st day of July, 2016

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P4 order by which respondent Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. suspended refill supplies to the petitioner, distributor. The petitioner is an LPG distributor of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. This writ petition was filed as early as on 20.03.2006. Petitioner himself has produced Ext.P6 show cause notice proposing termination of the dealership agreement executed between petitioner and respondent. Either Ext.P6 or the subsequent proceedings are not seen challenged. Apart from that the respondent has in paragraph No.3 of the counter affidavit stated that there is a provision for resorting to arbitration in Ext.R1(a) dealership agreement itself, under clause 38, in the event there is any difference of opinion or dispute between the parties.

¶31

W.P.C.No.8253/06

¶32

¶33

In the above circumstances, leaving it open for the petitioner to challenge the orders finalizing the proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 as well as P6 in appropriate proceedings, this writ petition is closed.

¶34

Sd/- (P.V.ASHA, JUDGE)

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

W.P.C.No.8253/06 3

Kochurani Antony v. Senior Regional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kochurani Antony v. Senior Regional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Ashraff Vs the Forest Range Officer

Suma P.S Vs K.S.R.T.C

M/S.Aluminium Industries Ltd. Vs the Dist. Labour Officer

K.P.Royachan Vs Tobin Antony

George Thomas Vs Kse Board

Prasanth Vs the District Collector and Another