Dismissed

Jose Varghese v. the Regional Service Co-Operative Bank, Kaduthuruthy Branch

Kerala HC11 Dec 2017WP(C)/16622/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam rejected the petition to quash an award of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies as not maintainable, as the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act provides a statutory remedy. The petition to quash the sale notice was dismissed because no sale was conducted due to an interim order.

What did the court decide?

Writ to quash award rejected as not maintainable; writ to quash sale notice dismissed as the sale was not conducted.

Jose Varghese Vs the Regional Service Co-Operative Bank… — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 16622 of 2016 (C)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

JOSE VARGHESE, S/O. VARGHESE, CHERIYAMKUNNEL HOUSE, KATTAMBACK, NJEEZHOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM.

¶8

BY ADV. SMT.E.V.MOLY

¶9

RESPONDENTS :

¶10

1. THE REGIONAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KADUTHURUTHY BRANCH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

2. THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER RSCB LTD, 4061, KADUTHURUTHY.

¶12

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.V.G.ARUN

¶13

SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR

¶14

R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.MABLE C.KURIAN

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No. 16622 of 2016 (C)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

P1: TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD IN 39/2015 OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY VAIKOM.

¶21

P2. TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 17/3/2016.

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.

¶27

W.P(C) No.16622 of 2016

¶28

Dated this the 11^th day of December, 2017

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The petitioner, who availed a loan for 20 lakhs from the₹ first respondent Society on 28.11.2012 has approached this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1 award passed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies bearing No.39/15 (KTM 2/15) and also Ext.P2 sale notice dated 17.3.2016 issued by the second respondent.

¶31

On 29.4.2016, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court issued urgent notice by speed post to the respondents. This Court has also passed an interim order to the effect that the sale pursuant to Ext.P2 shall not be confirmed without the orders of this Court.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned counsel for the respondents.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition on the ground that as

¶34

W.P(C) No.16622 of 2016

¶35

:-2-:

¶36

no sale could be conducted pursuant to Ext.P2, the relief sought for in this writ petition has become infructuous.

¶37

The said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. The first relief sought for in this writ petition is a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1 award of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and also Ext.P2 sale notice dated 17.3.2016 issued by the second respondent. Ext.P1 award passed by the competent authority cannot be challenged by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, when a statutory remedy is provided under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. In such circumstances, the challenge made in this writ petition against Ext.P1 award can only be rejected as not maintainable and I do so.

¶38

As far as the challenge made against Ext.P2 sale notice is concerned, the sale pursuant to the said notice was scheduled to be held on 29.4.2016. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank would submit that on account of the interim order passed by this Court on 24.9.2016, whereby confirmation of sale was made subject to further orders of this Court, no sale had taken place.

¶39

W.P(C) No.16622 of 2016 :-3-:

¶40

Since no sale had taken place on 29.4.2016 pursuant to Ext.P2 sale notice, this writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge fresh recovery steps, if any, taken by the second respondent Bank, in appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum.

¶41

Sd/- ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE //True Copy//

¶42

P.A to Judge

¶43

Jose Varghese v. the Regional Service Co-Operative Bank, Kaduthuruthy Branch

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jose Varghese v. the Regional Service Co-Operative Bank, Kaduthuruthy Branch

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

Save Madambi Action Council Vs the Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing & Marketing) Corporation Ltd.

Mohanan M.B Vs Co-Operative Housing Society

Ranjit N. Vs Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Pradeep.S Vs the Special Sale Officer

Isha Athussunna Al-Islamia Juma Masjid Vs the State of Kerala

Sunil Vs Vellanikkara Service Co-Operative Bank, NO.545