Bibin Sajan vs S.Vijayakumar
2021 Latest Caselaw 17512 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT
                    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
          Thursday, the 26th day of August 2021 / 4th Bhadra, 1943
                             CRP NO. 242 OF 2021
     OS 164/2020 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REVISION PETITIONER/PETITIONER/3RD DEFENDANT:

     BIBIN SAJAN, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. SAJAN C. VARGHESE, RESIDING AT
     CHEMBAKASSERIL HOUSE, EDAKKATTUVAYAL P.O., ARAKUNNAM,
     ERNAKULAM-682313.

      BY ADVS. M/S. K.P.SREEKUMAR & RAJESH PILLAI

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 AND PLAINTIFFS 1 TO 3:

  1. S.VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 67 YEARS,S/O SRI. P. SUKUMARAN NAIR, RESIDING AT
     197, PTP NAGAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695038.
  2. SAM KURUVILA, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O K.T KURUVILA RESIDING AT
     PYNUMOOTTIL SAM VILLA, TC 10/1640, MANNANTHALA P.O.,
     THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695015.
  3. K. ESWARA PILLAI, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. P.K. NAIR, 52, MR SQUARE, DH
     ROAD, M.G. ROAD P.O., ERNAKULAM-682016.


     THIS CRP HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ALONG WITH CONNECTED CASE NO.CRP
243/2021 ON 26.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLLOWING;




                                                                  (p.t.o)
                          V.G.ARUN (J)
                      -----------------------
             C.R.P. Nos. 242 and 243 of 2021
              ------------------------------------
            Dated this the 26th day of August, 2021

                             ORDER

During the course of hearing, learned Counsel for

the respondent raised an objection regarding

maintainability of these Civil Revision Petitions.

Reference is made to Section 8 and Section 37 (1) of the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act as also the decision of

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in [2021 (2) ALT 129], to

point out that the proper remedy is to file appeal against

the impugned order.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners cited

the decision of a learned Single Judge of this Court in

Korah M.P. (Dr) and Others v. Dr. Rachel Zacharia

[2017 (5) KHC 796], to contend that the revision is

maintainable. Specific reference is made to paragraph 20

of the judgment.

3. Having heard the learned Counsel, I am of the

opinion that the question regarding maintainability ought

to be decided before considering the revision on merits.

4. It is submitted that the court below is C.R.P. Nos. 242 and 243 of 2021

proceeding with the suit and is insisting that the written

statements should be filed immediately.

As the matter is pending consideration before this

court, the court below is directed to defer further

proceedings in the suit for a period of two weeks.

Post on 13.09.2021 for further consideration.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE RK

26-08-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar