Dismissed

Mavelikkara Taluk Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. Rajani Venugopal

Kerala HC7 Dec 2020WA/1245/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ appeal, co-operative bank appellants challenged a Single Judge order directing them to repay matured fixed deposits in instalments to a deceased member's widow. The bench dismissed the appeal, rejecting financial crisis pleas and refusing to interfere with the lower court's direction.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was dismissed without awarding costs; the previous order directing repayment in instalments remained intact.

Mavelikkara Taluk Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs Rajani… — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL

¶6

MONDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶7

WA.No.1245 OF 2020

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.03.2020 IN WP(C) NO. 3102/2020(K) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶9

APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS NO. 3 & 4:

¶10

1 MAVELIKKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.707, MAVELIKKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA-690 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

2 MANAGING COMMITTEE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.707, MAVELIKKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA-690 101.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR

¶13

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS NO. 1 & 2:

¶14

1 RAJANI VENUGOPAL

¶15

W/O.LATE VENUGOPAL, PALLATTUSSERIL, KUTTEMPEROOR, P.O.MANNAR, ALAPPUZHA-689 623.

¶16

2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶17

3 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, TECHI ANGALAMMAN COMPLEX,

¶18

W.A.No. 1245 of 2020 2

¶19

OPP. ST.ANTONYES SCHOOL, THIRUVAMBADY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 002.

¶20

R1 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM R2 & R3 BY SMT.K.R.DEEPA, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶21

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-11-2020, THE COURT ON 07-12-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

W.A.No. 1245 of 2020 3

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Haripal J.

¶25

Appellants are the respondents 3 and 4 in W.P(C.) No. 3102/2020 filed by the first respondent. It is the common case that the husband of the first respondent, B. Venugopal, had made two fixed deposits, evidenced by Exts.P1 and P2 for Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.3,50,000/- respectively, in the appellant society for one year. The case of the first respondent is that the said Venugopal was employed as Nursing Assistant Supervisor in the General Reserve Engineering Force (GREF), which is part of the Boarder Roads Organization under the Ministry of Defence; on 26.06.2017, while he was moving in a Maruti Gypsy vehicle in discharge of official duties through Taliha – Nacho Road in Arunachal Pradesh, the vehicle met with an accident and fell into the Subansiri River Valley. Because of the peculiarity of the geographical position and ferocity of the river flow, the vehicle and its passengers could not be traced. Now the hapless widow, the first respondent, is doing stitching work to bring up the two girl children. There was nomination in the fixed deposits in her

¶26

W.A.No. 1245 of 2020 4

¶27

favour. Even though both the deposits attained maturity in 2015 and 2016 respectively, the bank did not repay the same and that made her to approach this Court seeking a writ of mandamus, for getting back the amount.

¶28

The appellants filed counter affidavit, inter alia contending that during the period of the former Managing Committee, large scale misappropriation of funds have taken place, the society has already initiated steps under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The counter affidavit was highlighting mainly their financial stringency. However, it was submitted that 'even though the bank is facing severe financial crisis the bank is ready to disburse the fixed deposits in twelve equal monthly instalments starting from 01.05.2020 onwards'. Taking note of the above submission, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition directing the bank to disburse the fixed deposit amount in twelve equal successive monthly instalments commencing from 01.05.2020. It is challenging the above judgment, now this appeal has been preferred under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act.

¶29

We heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the

¶30

W.A.No. 1245 of 2020 5

¶31

learned counsel for the first respondent/petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶32

In the course of hearing, it was pointed out that a review petition filed by the appellants was dismissed by the learned Judge. Since no instalment was paid as directed, the first respondent has filed

¶33

a contempt petition, which is now pending before the learned Single Judge.

¶34

The only argument canvassed by the learned counsel for the appellants was the financial crisis of the society, owing to large scale misappropriation of funds during the reigns of the former Managing Committee. We have no doubt that it is not a ground worth mentioning in not repaying the amount accepted by the bank in fixed deposit, especially long after it had become mature. Secondly, as pointed out earlier, the judgment was passed by the learned Single Judge on the lines of the offer made by the appellants agreeing to repay the same in instalments. In fact the learned Single Judge had shown indulgence despite the fact that the first respondent was driven to the court unable to get back the money to which she is legally entitled.

¶35

W.A.No. 1245 of 2020 6

¶36

Learned counsel for the appellants had raised a faint plea that the first respondent did not produce the death certificate of her husband or legal heirship certificate etc. In fact they are estopped from taking such a plea before the appellate court for the first time, after agreeing to repay the amount in instalments after taking into account

¶37

the entire factual aspects. In this context, it is only appropriate to extract the following recitals from the counter affidavit filed by the appellants herein in the writ petition:-

¶38

“It is submitted that even though the bank is facing severe financial crisis the bank is ready to disburse the fixed deposit in 12 equal monthly instalments starting from May 01.05.2020 onwards.”

¶39

Even otherwise, the first respondent has given an affidavit, Annexure R1(a) stating that while in service of the GREF her husband had gone missing, that she has been paid service benefits including family pension as the dependant and legal heir of B. Venugopal.

¶40

We have no doubt that these are lame excuses raised by the appellants to put off the repayment under one pretext or the other. It is unfortunate that after receiving fixed deposits, the depositor or his legal heirs are made to run from pillar to post to get back the money.

¶41

W.A.No. 1245 of 2020 7

¶42

Even after making an undertaking to repay the sum in instalments, new reasons are being invented to delay the payment. Such a course adopted by a co-operative society is deplorable. Even when the appeal was posted on 30.10.2020, we were told that the defaulted instalments will be paid by them and that was how a short adjournment was given.

¶43

But when taken up on 02.11.2020, the learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that no amount was paid that day also. Whatever

¶44

it may be, there is no legal ground to interfere with the judgment under challenge.

¶45

The appeal is bereft of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Dismissed. We refrain from awarding costs.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL, JUDGE

DCS/02.11.2020

W.A.No. 1245 of 2020 8

¶52

APPENDIX

¶53

RESPONDENT'S/S ANNEXURES:

¶54

ANNEXURE R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN STAMP PAPER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECRETARY, MAVELIKKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK

¶55

ANNEXURE R1(b) TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT EVIDENCING THE DETAILS OF TERMINAL BENEFITS INCLUDING FAMILY PENSION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER HEREIN

¶56

ANNEXURE R1(c) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13.10.2020 SENT BY THE SECRETARY, MAVELIKKAR TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK

¶57

ANNEXURE R1(d) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DATED 14.10.2020 SENT BY THE PETITIONER

Mavelikkara Taluk Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. Rajani Venugopal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mavelikkara Taluk Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. Rajani Venugopal

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

Gopalakrishnan K Vs Sandeep Biswas

A.Sajeevan Vs the Commissioner

Vishnu P.C. Vs Guruvayur Devaswom Administrator

Hamjad Ali, Vs the Commissioner of Customers (Prev)

Suo Motu Vs the Managing Committee

Travancore Devaswom Board Vs Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit