Hamza M vs The Perinthalmanna Service ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 11411 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

    THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                       WP(C).No.8905 OF 2021(K)


PETITIONERS:

      1        HAMZA M.
               AGED 64 YEARS
               S/O. MOIDU, MELETHIL HOUSE, PATHAYIKKARA,
               PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679 322.

      2        UMMUSULMA M.
               AGED 55 YEARS
               W/O.HAMZA, MELETHIL HOUSE, PATHAYIKKARA,
               PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679 322.

               BY ADV. SHRI.M.C.JOHN

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE PERINTHALMANNA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
               REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM,
               PIN - 676 505.

      2        THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERAITVE SOCIETIES
               OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
               SOCIETIES (GENERAL), MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505.


OTHER PRESENT:

               SR.GP K.P HARISH

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.8905 OF 2021(K)

                                       2




                                   JUDGMENT

Dated this the 8th day of April 2021

The petitioners herein, who are the husband and

wife had availed loan from the first respondent bank,

mortgaging their properties. ARC proceedings were

initiated evidenced by Exts.P3 and P4 and are pending.

The petitioners contends that they are ready to

discharge the liability whatever it may be, provided

they are given some time. They apprehend that if the

property is sold, that may cause irreparable injury to

them. Hence, the prayer sought is for a direction to the

first respondent to provide atleast six months' time to

discharge the arrears as per Exts.P3 and P4.

2. Since, the arbitration proceedings have

commenced, it may not be proper on the part of this

court to interfere in the jurisdiction of that court and to

preempt that if the orders are adverse to the

petitioners, their properties are likely to be sold in

future. Then anxiety of the petitioners regarding sale WP(C).No.8905 OF 2021(K)

can arise only after award is passed.

3. Having considered this, I am inclined to

direct that it will be open to the petitioners to file

written objections before the arbitrator and to seek time

for discharging the liability. The petitioners may seek

their relief thereafter, if any further grievance survives.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE SKP/8-4 WP(C).No.8905 OF 2021(K)

APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERIPHERAL BLOOD SMEAR REPORT DATED 23.11.2015 ISSUED BY MOULANA HOSPITAL.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 08.02.2021 ISSUED BY LAKESHORE HOSPITAL.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN ARB. CASE NO.2/21 DATED 18.12.2020 FILED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P3.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN ARB. CASE NO.3/21 DATED 18.12.2020 FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P4.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL

TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE