Kerala High Court
Thomas P.P vs The Assistant Registrar on 1 November, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
2024:KER:81399
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1946
RP NO. 1037 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.30097 OF 2024
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
THOMAS P.P
AGED 75 YEARS, S/O. PATHROSE,
PULIKKAL HOUSE, EZHAKARANAD KARA,
MANEED VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY HIS WIFE AND NEXT FRIEND
SARAMMA THOMAS, AGED 66 YEARS, PULIKKAL HOUSE,
EZHAKARANAD KARA, MANEED VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA
TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-, PIN - 682308
BY ADVS.
PAUL K.VARGHESE
A.A.GEETHA
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(SPECIAL SALES OFFICER/ ARBITRATOR),
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES (GENERAL), MUVATTUPUZHA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682308.
R.P.No.1037 of 2024 in
W.P.(C) No.30097 of 2024
:2: 2024:KER:81399
2 THE MANEED SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
E59, MANEED P.O., PIRAVOM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN - 682308
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
BINU K. VARGHESE.
3 SIVADAS P.R
AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR,
PARIYARATH HOUSE, MANEED VILLAGE,
MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM - 682308.
4 KURIAKOSE, M.M
AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. MATHAI,
MUTHATTUKUZHIYL HOUSE, EZHAKARANAD KARA,
MANEED VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682308.
BY ADV.SRI.SUNU P. JOHN, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
R.P.No.1037 of 2024 in
W.P.(C) No.30097 of 2024
:3: 2024:KER:81399
ORDER
Dated this the 1st day of November, 2024 W.P.(C) Nos.30097 of 2024 and 30005 of 2024 came up for admission on the same day. W.P.(C) No.30005 of 2024 was disposed of in the forenoon. Subsequently, W.P.(C) No.30097 of 2024 also was disposed of.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as this Court followed a judgment in the earlier writ petition, in paragraph No.4 of the judgment in W.P.(C) No.30097 of 2024, it was noted that the petitioner had participated in the Arbitral proceedings. It is a factual mistake. The petitioner was ex-parte in the Arbitral proceedings. Therefore, there is an error apparent on the face of the record and the judgment is liable to be reviewed.
R.P.No.1037 of 2024 in W.P.(C) No.30097 of 2024 :4: 2024:KER:81399
3. I have perused the pleadings. It is true that the petitioner remained ex-parte in the ARC No.431 of 2022. However, the relief granted in the judgment will not affect in any manner by correcting the factual error.
In view of the above, the revision petition is allowed. The judgment in the writ petition will stand corrected as follows:-
Paragraph No.4 of the judgment in W.P.(C) No.30097 of 2024 is deleted and paragraph Nos.5 to 7 are renumbered as paragraph Nos.4 to 6.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH JUDGE ams