Disposed

Anil Kumar P.P v. the Kannur Town Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. C-844

Kerala HC1 Mar 2018WP(C)/2882/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Co-operative Tribunal to consider the petitioner's stay application within three weeks. The interim stay on the sale notice remains in force, and the petitioner is directed to avail the One Time Settlement Scheme if applying within one week.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the Tribunal to consider stay application within 3 weeks; interim stay continued; petitioner directed to opt for One Time Settlement.

Anil Kumar P.P Vs the Kannur Town Service Co-Operative… — 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

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 2882 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ANIL KUMAR P.P AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. GOVINDAN, PUTHANPURAYIL, KAKKAD, KANNUR P.O

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY

¶9

SRI.ANIL GEORGE SRI.K.S.SUMEESH SRI.T.ANCY SMT.NIVYA VALSAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

THE KANNUR TOWN SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. C-844 KANNUR-670 007

¶12

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶13

THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR(GENERAL) OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KANNUR,KANNUR DISTRICT PIN 670 001

¶14

SPECIAL SALES OFFICER

¶15

KANNUR TOWN SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK GROUP, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL), KANNUR PIN 670 001

¶16

R1 BY ADV. SMT.C.LEENA

¶17

R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.S.SHEEJA

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C).No. 2882 of 2018 (I)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶22

EXHIBIT P1 THE PHOTOCOPY OF PLAINT FILED BY THE SECRETARYOF KANNUR TOWN SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK DATED 26-05-2015

¶23

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AWARD DATED 20-10-2016

¶24

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REVISION PETITION IN R.P NO. 11 OF 2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶25

EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STAY PETITION IN I.A.No. 9/2018

¶26

EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER RULE 81 DATED 27-12-2017

¶27

RESPONDENTS' EXTS: NIL

//TRUE COPY

P.S. TO JUDGE//

dsn

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.

¶32

--------------------------------------------------

¶33

W.P.(C)No.2882 of 2018

¶34

-------------------------------------------------DATED THIS THE 1^st DAY OF MARCH, 2018

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

The petitioner who availed a loan of `15 lakhs from the 1^st respondent Bank in the year 2013 has approached this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the State Co-operative Tribunal to consider Ext.P4 interlocutory application for stay at the earliest. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 3^rd respondent not to proceed with the sale of the property in question till the disposal of Ext.P4 stay petition.

¶37

On 29.01.2018, when this writ petition came up for admission, learned Senior Government Pleader took notice for the 2^nd respondent. This court issued urgent notice on admission by speed post to respondents 1 and 3 returnable within three weeks. This Court has also granted an interim stay of operation of Ext.P5 for a period of one month on condition that the petitioner deposits a sum of `2,00,000/- with the 1^st respondent within a period of one week from 29.1.2018 and the said interim order is still in force.

¶38

W.P.(C)No.2882 of 2018 -2-

¶39

Today when the case is taken up for further consideration, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already complied with the direction contained in the interim order of this Court dated 29.1.2018.

¶40

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the 1^st respondent Bank and also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

¶41

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Tribunal ought to have considered Ext.P4 interlocutory application filed in Ext.P3 revision petition, instead of adjourning the matter.

¶42

The learned counsel for the 1^st respondent Bank would submit that the total liability as per Ext.P5 sale notice is `20,57,596/- and that, in view of the circular of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, the petitioner can opt for One Time Settlement Scheme, i.e., “Navakeraleeyam Kudisika Nivaranam - 2018”.

¶43

After considering the rival submissions, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶44

W.P.(C)No.2882 of 2018

¶45

-3-

¶46

(i) The Co-operative Tribunal shall consider Ext.P4 interlocutory application filed in Ext.P3 revision petition, i.e., R.P.No.11/2018 and pass appropriate orders thereon with notice to the petitioner and also to the 1^st respondent Bank, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶47

(ii) Till such orders are passed, the interim order granted by this Court on 29.01.2018 shall continue to be in force.

¶48

This judgment will not stand in the way of the petitioner availing the benefit of One Time Settlement under the “Navakeraleeyam Kudisika Nivaranam - 2018”, by making a proper application before the 1^st respondent Bank. If any such application is made within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the 1^st respondent Bank shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with that Scheme.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

ANIL K. NARENDRAN

JUDGE

dsn

//True copy

P.S. to Judge//

Anil Kumar P.P v. the Kannur Town Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. C-844

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar P.P v. the Kannur Town Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. C-844

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

K.v.Joseph Vs the Thodupuzha Co-Operaive Primary Agricultural & Rural Development Bank LTD.NO.4388

Jessan Vs Sepcial Sale Officer, Thrissur Sahakarana Karshika Grama Vikasan Bank

Santhosh.K.v Vs Malabar Regional Co-Operative Milk Producers Union Ltd. (Milma)

M/S.Canara Bank Ltd. Vs Regional Transport Officer

Anup Kumar Vs the Excise Commissioner

Jibin Baby Vs Secretary, Regional Transport Authority,Idukki