Quashed

Smt.G.Manjula Devi v. Deputy Registrar of Coop Societies/

Telangana HC18 Mar 2006WP/2720/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a petitioner alleging non-supply of an arbitral award copy. With the award now furnished, the Court quashed the auction notices and directed a three-week moratorium on auction proceedings to allow the petitioner to pursue remedies against the award.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of quashing notices dated 10-01-2006; respondents forbidden from issuing further auction notices for three weeks.

Smt.G.Manjula Devi Vs Deputy Registrar of Coop… — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2006)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶2

W.P.NO.2720 OF 2006

¶3

Between:

¶4

Smt.G.Manjula Devi wife of G.S.Ranga Nayakulu

¶5

…Petitioner

¶6

vs.

¶7

Deputy Registrar of Coop Societies/Divisional Coop Officer Golconda Division, Hyderabad and five others.

¶8

…Respondents.

¶9

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶10

W.P.NO.2720 OF 2006

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

The petitioner is alleged to be a guarantor to an overdraft facility availed by the 6^th respondent for Rs.25 lakhs from the 5^th respondent-Cooperative Bank which is under

¶13

liquidation and is represented by the Official Liquidator. On failure of the 6^th respondent in clearing the overdraft, the Bank has proceeded against the petitioner, the 6^th respondent and others for recovery of the amounts by way of an arbitral dispute ARC No.554/J1/2000. By the award dated 06-06-2000 joint and several liability of the petitioner and the 6^th respondent was found and an award passed. The petitioner’s complaint is that despite numerous representations, a copy of the award has not been supplied to him.

¶14

Earlier execution proceedings were initiated in E.P.No.400 of 2004. The petitioner’s immovable property was attached pursuant to the award dated 06-06-2000 and the attached properties notified for auction. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner filed W.P.No.11837 of 2005 and this Court suspended the notices proposing auction of the properties by an interim order dated 07-06-2005 for a limited period that has since expired. Petitioner states that the properties are again notified for sale by a notice dated 10-01-2006 fixing the date of public auction on 21-02-2006. The petitioner continues to complain that copy of the award in ARC No.554/J1/2000 has not been furnished despite repeated representations.

¶15

To day in the Court the learned Government Pleader for Co-operative Societies has handed over a copy of the award in ARC No.554/J1/2000, dated 10-10-2006 to the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is now at liberty to pursue her appropriate remedies against the award including by way of appeal to the Co-operative Tribunal under Sec.76 of the A.P.Co-operative Societies Act,1964. As the award copy has just been furnished to the petitioner, it is not just or equitable that the respondents should proceed with the auction of the attached properties of the petitioner pursuant to the proceedings dated 10-10-2006 notifying the auction. The auction is scheduled on 21-02-2006.

¶16

In the aforesaid circumstances the writ petition is disposed of quashing the notices dated 10-01-2006 issued in Form Nos.8 and 9 notifying the attached properties of the petitioner for public auction scheduled on 21-02-2006. The respondents will forbear from issuing any further notices for the auction of the petitioner’s properties for a period of three (3) weeks from today. In the meanwhile the petitioner is at liberty to pursue her appropriate remedies against the award dated 06-06-2000 in ARC.No554/J1/2000. After the period of three (3) weeks, the respondents are at liberty to pursue execution of the above award subject to any interdictory orders if passed by an appropriate and competent forum. No order as to costs.

¶17

GODA RAGHURAM,J

¶18

14^TH FEBRUARY 2006

¶19

*TSNR

Smt.G.Manjula Devi v. Deputy Registrar of Coop Societies/

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.G.Manjula Devi v. Deputy Registrar of Coop Societies/

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

S. Subramanyam, Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments

G. Rama Bhupal Vs The Commissioner of Proh. and Excise

Alind Employees Association, Vs Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstructio

Senior Divisional Manager., Vs The Honble Censtral Government

V. Praveen Kumar Vs M/s. Manasa Coop. Urban Bank

The Managing Committee of the Toddy Tappers Vs The Proh. and Excise Superintendent