Disposed

Siby Mathew v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Jul 2024WP(C)/5562/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners aggrieved by arbitration awards and Tribunal appeal dismissal concerning recovery claims by a co-operative bank against them and their late father. The court arranged an OTS concession reducing the payable amount and disposed of the writ petition directing repayment in installments.

What did the court decide?

Payment of reduced total Rs.5,40,989 via staged remittances and ten equal monthly installments with interest; on default, respondents free to proceed lawfully.

Siby Mathew Vs State of Kerala — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 25^th DAY OF JULY 2024 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 5562 OF 2023

¶6

WRIT PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 SIBY MATHEW, S/o MATHEW, AGED 56 YEARS, PULPRAYIL HOUSE, MANJOOR PO, KOTHANELLOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686603

¶8

2 P.M JOSEPH, S/o MATHEW, AGED 53 YEARS, PULPRAYIL HOUSE, MANJOOR PO, KOTHANELLOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686603

¶9

3 BINCE MATHEW, S/o MATHEW, AGED 48 YEARS, PULPRAYIL HOUSE, MANJOOR PO, KOTHANELLOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686603

BY ADVS. P.C.HARIDAS

P.S.GOVIND

RESPONDENTS:

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶14

2 THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014

¶15

3 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686141

¶16

4 MANJOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED. NO.KER 73, MANJOOR PO, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686603

¶17

5 BEENA MATHEW, WIFE OF ALEX MATHEW, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOCHUPOOVATHUMMOOTTIL HOUSE, KANNIMALA PO, ERUMELI,

¶18

WP(C) No.5562 of 2023

¶19

¶20

KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN – 686509

¶21

BY ADV.LIJI J VADAKEDOM SC

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 25.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C) No.5562 of 2023

¶24

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

Dated this the 25^th day of July, 2024

¶27

The petitioners are aggrieved by Exts.P12, P13 and P17. The 4^th respondent filed ARC Nos.154/2012 and 156/2012 (Exts.P1 and P2) before the Arbitrator, seeking recovery of the amounts due from the 1^st petitioner and Mathew, father of the petitioners, who died during the pendency of the proceedings.

¶28

As per Ext.P5, ARC No.154/2012 was dismissed, for the reason that the 4^th respondent had failed to prove its claim. The other case was allowed as per Ext.P6 Award. Against both the Awards, appeals were filed from either side. By Ext.P7 judgment, the Kerala Co-operative Tribunal set aside Exts.P5 and P6 Awards and remitted the matter back to the Arbitrator.

¶29

The 4^th respondent adduced evidence in order to prove its claim and the evidence was closed, without producing material documents, contends the petitioner. Thereafter, though attempts were made to reopen the evidence and to produce those documents, the Arbitrator had declined the same as per Exts.P9 and P10 orders. The case was heard and posted for passing

¶30

WP(C) No.5562 of 2023

¶31

¶32

Award. During that stage, the 4^th respondent had produced certain documents before the Arbitrator, without any notice to the borrowers. The Arbitrator accepted the documents and relying upon those documents, Exts.P12 and P13 Awards were passed.

¶33

Against the same, the petitioners preferred Exts.P14 and P15 appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by Ext.P17 judgment dismissed the appeal confirming the two Awards passed by the Arbitrator. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have filed this writ petition.

¶34

Standing counsel entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel denied all the allegations made by the petitioners in the writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, it is pointed out that under the account KCC-52, an amount of Rs.5,76,816/- is outstanding and under the account KCC-53, Rs.4,09,010/- is outstanding in the accounts of the petitioners.

¶35

As per the suggestion of this Court, the Bank considered the issue of grant of waiver. Going by the provisions of OTS Scheme, the petitioners can be granted a concession of

¶36

WP(C) No.5562 of 2023

¶37

¶38

Rs.2,39,190/- in KCC-52 and Rs.2,05,687 in KCC-53 after adjusting the amount of Rs.50,000/- paid by the petitioners during the pendency of this writ petition. After giving such concession, the total amount payable by the petitioners would be Rs.5,40,989/- and the said amount will have to be paid on or before 31.07.2024.

¶39

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶40

learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.

¶41

From the pleadings in the writ petition and the arguments

¶42

raised at the Bar, it is evident that the petitioners are not in a position to settle the loan account in lumpsum, as the outstanding amount is a huge sum. Therefore, it will be only proper that the petitioners are given a limited breathing time to make repayment in short installments. At the same time, as the Bank is extending benefit, which is ordinarily given only to OTS proposals, I am of the view that the petitioners will be liable to be pay interest on the outstanding amount till the entire amount is paid off.

¶43

In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:

¶44

(i) The petitioners shall remit an amount of Rs.50,000/- on or before 31.07.2024.

¶45

WP(C) No.5562 of 2023

¶46

¶47

(ii) The petitioners shall pay a further amount of Rs.1,50,000/-

¶48

on or before 25.08.2024.

¶49

(iii) The balance amount out of Rs.5,40,989/- shall be paid thereafter in ten subsequent and consecutive equal monthly installments along with accruing interest and other Bank charges, if any.

¶50

(iv) If the petitioners commit default in making payments as directed above, the respondents will be free to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with the law.

¶51

(v) The benefits given under this judgment will be available

¶52

only if the petitioners make payments as directed above.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

DMR/-

WP(C) No.5562 of 2023

¶58

¶59

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5562/2023

¶60

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

¶61

Exhibit-P1	TRUE COPY	OF PLAINT IN ARC NO.	154/2012
Exhibit-P2	TRUE COPY	OF PLAINT IN ARC NO.1	56/2012
Exhibit-P3	TRUE COPY ARC NO. 15	OF WRITTEN STATEMEN 4/2012	T FILED IN
Exhibit-P4	TRUE COPY IN ARC NO.	OF THE WRITTEN STATE 156/2012	MENT FILED
Exhibit-P5	TRUE COPY IN ARC NO.	OF THE AWARD DATED 154/2012	21/10/2017
Exhibit-P6	TRUE COPY IN ARC NO.	OF THE AWARD DATED 156/2012	21/IN/2017
Exhibit-P7	TRUE COP 13/06/2018 THE KER THIRUVANAN	Y OF THE JUDGME IN APPEAL NUMBER ALA COOPERATIVE THAPURAM	NT DATED 94/2017 OF TRIBUNAL,
Exhibit-P8	TRUE COP 13/06/2018 THE KER THIRUVANAN	Y OF THE JUDGME IN APPEAL NUMBER ALA COOPERATIVE THAPURAM	NT DATED 98/2017 OF TRIBUNAL,
Exhibit-P9	TRUE COPY IN ARC NO.	OF THE ORDER DATED 154/2012	04/07/2019
Exhibit-P10	TRUE COPY IN ARC NO.	OF THE ORDER DATED 156/2012	04/07/2019
Exhibit-P11	TRUE COPY ARBITRATOR	OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN ARC NO 154/2012	BEFORE THE
Exhibit-P12	TRUE COPY IN ARC NO	OF THE AWARD DATED 154/2012	29/07/2019
Exhibit-P13	TRUE COPY IN ARC NO	OF THE AWARD DATED 156/2012	29/07/2019
Exhibit-P14	TRUE COPY APPEAL NU	OF THE MEMORANDUM OF MBER 157/2019 ON THE	APPEAL IN FILES OF

¶62

WP(C) No.5562 of 2023

¶63

¶64

	THE THIRU	KER VANAN	ALA THAP	C URAM	OOPERATIVE	TRIBUNAL,
Exhibit-P15	TRUE APPEA THE THIRU	COPY L NU KER VANAN	OF MBER ALA THAP	THE 158 C URAM	MEMORANDUM OF /2019 ON THE OOPERATIVE	APPEAL IN FILES OF TRIBUNAL,
Exhibit-P16	TRUE IN EX	COPY T.P14	OF AND	THE P15	ARGUMENT NOTE APPEALS	SUBMITTED
Exhibit-P17	TRUE 07/03 158/2 TRIBU	COPY /2022 019 NAL,	OF IN OF THIR	THE APPE TH UVAN	COMMON JUDGM AL NUMBERS 15 E KERALA C ANTHAPURAM	ENT DATED 7/2019 AND OOPERATIVE
Exhibit-P18	TRUE 2016 THE THIRU	COPY FILED COO VANAN	OF BY PERA THAP	THE THE TIVE URAM	PLAINT IN ARC 1ST PETITION ARBITRATION .	NO. 46 OF ER BEFORE COURT,

¶65

// TRUE COPY //

¶66

P.A. TO JUDGE

Siby Mathew v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siby Mathew v. State of Kerala

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

The General Secretary, Kerala Uranma Devaswom Board Vs v.Gopalakrishnan

Mujeeb K.I Vs Mundakkayam Service Cooperative Bank Ltd., Represented by Its Manager

Anil Kumar Vs the Sub Registrar

Minu P. v Vs Thevalakkara Farmer'S Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. 4047 Thevalakkara

The Registrar of Trade Unions (Labour Commissioner), Vs the Social Democratic Trade Union

The Managing Director Vs Joy Mathew