Dismissed

The Pallikkunnu Service Co. Operative Bank Ltd.No. C.350 v. the Co. Operative Arbitration Court (Northern)

Kerala HC3 Dec 2018WP(C)/11338/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by a cooperative bank to quash an Arbitration Court order extending the validity of interim measures. The High Court dismissed the petition after the Government Pleader reported the petitioner had been served notice and filed a counter statement, vacating the interim stay.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with consequential vacation of the interim stay. The Arbitration Court is directed to dispose of the matter within four months.

The Pallikkunnu Service Co. Operative Bank Ltd.No… — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

MONDAY,THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 11338 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

THE PALLIKKUNNU SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.C.350 REPRESENTED BY PRESIDENT, CHALAD P.O., KANNUR-670014. BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.MOHANAN SMT.J.LAKSHMI SRI.C.P.SABARI

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 THE CO OPERATIVE ARBITRATION COURT (NORTHERN) REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶10

2 T.K. NINIL, RAJANI, MANAL, P.O. ALAVIL, KANNUR, PIN-670008. BY ADVS.SMT.M.MEENA JOHN SRI.VIJU THOMAS SMT. MABLE C.KURIEN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C).No. 11338 of 2018

¶13

-2-

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

The petitioner, which is a Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 and the Rules made thereunder, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P5 order dated 23.01.2018 of the 1^st respondent Co-operative Arbitration Court in I.A.No.36 of 2017 in I.A.No.1 of 2017 in ARC No.3 of 2017, whereby the operation of the orders in I.A.No.1 of 2017 was extended for a further period of three months. The petitioner has also sought for a declaration that the 1^st respondent cannot extend Ext.P2 order dated 06.01.2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2017 in ARC No.3 of 2017, without serving the petitioner a copy of I.A.No.36/2017 and without conducting hearing.

¶16

On 03.04.2018, when this writ petition came up for admission, notice was ordered by speed post. This Court granted an interim stay for a period of two months. The said interim order was extended from time to time.

¶17

On 17.09.2018, when this writ petition came up

¶18

WP(C).No. 11338 of 2018

¶19

-3-

¶20

for consideration, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions from the 1^st respondent Cooperative Arbitration Court as to whether Ext.P2 order passed by the said court in I.A.No.1 of 2017 in ARC No.3 of 2017 is one with notice to the petitioner, who is the 1^st respondent in that interlocutory application. The learned Government Pleader was also directed to get instructions as to whether a copy of I.A.No.36 of 2017 was served to the learned counsel who represents the petitioner Bank before the 1^st respondent Co-operative Arbitration Court.

¶21

On 16.10.2018, when this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the copy of I.A.No.36 of 2017 in I.A.No.1 of 2017 in ARC No.3 of 2017 was served on the learned counsel who represented the petitioner Bank before that court and a voucher to that effect is also available in the case records. The learned Government Pleader submitted further that summons was issued to the Bank with copy of ARC No.3 of 2017 and I.A.No.1 of 2017 and the Bank and its

¶22

WP(C).No. 11338 of 2018

¶23

-4-

¶24

Managing Committee, the defendants in that ARC, filed their counter statement in ARC and also in the interlocutory application. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought adjournment.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 1^st respondent Co-operative Arbitration Court and also the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent.

¶26

As already noticed, a copy of I.A.No.36 of 2017 in

¶27

I.A.No.1 of 2017 in ARC No.3 of 2017 was served on the petitioner Bank and that the summons was issued to the Bank with copy of ARC No.3 of 2017 and I.A.No.1 of 2017 and the Bank and its Managing Committee, the defendants in that ARC, filed their counter statement. If that be so, the challenge made in this writ petition against Ext.P5 order and also the consequential declaration cannot be granted.

¶28

In the result, the writ petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed.

¶29

Consequently, the interim order granted in this writ

¶30

WP(C).No. 11338 of 2018

¶31

-5-

¶32

petition is vacated. The 1^st respondent Co-operative Arbitration Court shall finally dispose of ARC No.3 of 2017, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of

this judgment.

Sd/-

ANIL K.NARENDRAN

JUDGE

bpr

WP(C).No. 11338 of 2018

¶39

-6-

¶40

APPENDIX

¶41

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶42

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.05.2016. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. 1/2017 IN ARC.NO.3/2017 DATED 06.01.2017. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.08.2017 IN W.P.(C) NO.28651/17. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.01.2018 IN I.A.NO.36/2017.

¶43

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶44

//TRUE COPY//

¶45

P.A. TO JUDGE

The Pallikkunnu Service Co. Operative Bank Ltd.No. C.350 v. the Co. Operative Arbitration Court (Northern)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Pallikkunnu Service Co. Operative Bank Ltd.No. C.350 v. the Co. Operative Arbitration Court (Northern)

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

Jamsheer V.P Vs Calicut City Co-Operative Bank

Ahammed Kutty Vs the Regional Transport Authority

K.J.Poulose Vs the Deputy Director of Diary Development

The Board of Directors Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies [ General]

Anthony Vs Joint Registrar (General) Co-Operative Societies

Gopan Vs the State of Kerala