Kerala High Court
Perumkadavila Rural Development ... vs Thiruvananthapuram District ... on 14 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 22287 OF 2023
PETITIONER/S:
1 PERUMKADAVILA RURAL DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
LTD.T. 1506, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
PERUMKADAVILA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
KERALA, PIN - 695124
2 V K RENJINI
AGED 42 YEARS
WIFE OF MURUGAN, SECRETARY, PERUMKADAVILA RURAL
DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. T.1506,
PERUMKADAVILA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA- 695124,
RESIDING AT SREERENJINI, KALLAMBALAM, AALLUVILA,
BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695501
3 K SOMAN NAIR
AGED 71 YEARS
SON OF KUTTAPPAN, PRESIDENT, PERUMKADAVILA RURAL
DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD T.1506,
PERUMKADAVILA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA- 695 124,
RESIDING AT DURGA NIVAS, THATHIYOOR, MARAYAMUTTOM P O,
NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695124
BY ADVS.
REKHA VASUDEVAN
MAHESH C.R.
SOYA D.C
ELIZABETH V.JOSEPH
ROJIT ZACHARIAH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, (NOW KERALA STATE
CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.) REGIONAL OFFICE, REPRESENTED BY
REGIONAL MANAGER, STATUE JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
KERALA, PIN - 695501
2 SRI K C KOMALAN NAIR
COMMITTEE MEMBER, PERUMKADAVILA RURAL DEVELOPMENT CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD T.1506, PERUMKADAVILA P O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695124
3 SRI B SIVANKUTTY
COMMITTEE MEMBER, PERUMKADAVILA RURAL DEVELOPMENT CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD T.1506, PERUMKADAVILA P O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695124
WP(C) NO. 22287 OF 2023 2
4 SRI R SASIDHARAN
COMMITTEE MEMBER, PERUMKADAVILA RURAL DEVELOPMENT CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD T.1506, PERUMKADAVILA P O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695124
5 SRI K SUKUMARAN NAIR
COMMITTEE MEMBER, PERUMKADAVILA RURAL DEVELOPMENT CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD T.1506, PERUMKADAVILA P O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695124
6 THE CO OPERATIVE ARBITRATION COURT
REPRESENTED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ARBITRATOR,
OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF THE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695014
7 THE KERALA CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, JAWAHAR SAHAKARNA BHAVAN,
DPI JUNCTION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
KERALA, PIN - 695014
BY ADVS.
Thomas Abraham
AMBILY PREMKUMAR .
SMT. C.S. SHEEJA, SR. GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 22287 OF 2023 3
JUDGMENT
Petitioners have approached this Court, challenging Ext.P6
award of the Co-operative Arbitration Court in ARC No.12 of
2020.
2. The first respondent initiated proceedings against the
petitioners for the recovery of amounts due under loans stated to
have been sanctioned by the 1 st respondent to the 1 st petitioner-
Society. There were several claims. We are concerned here with
the claim raised in ARC 12 of 2020. In the arbitration
proceedings before the arbitrator under Section 69 of the Kerala
Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, the 1 st petitioner requested for
documents relied on by the 1 st respondent bank to establish the
claim filed before the arbitrator. According to the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners, without considering the petition
filed seeking copies of the documents, the Arbitration Case was
adjudicated and Ext.P6 award was passed, permitting the 1 st
respondent to recover a total amount of Rs.80,75,154/- together
with future interest. The petitioners filed Revision Petition No.33
of 2022 before the Kerala Co-operative Tribunal,
Thiruvananthapuram, against Ext.P6 award. The Tribunal, by
Ext.P8 order (which is a common order in Revision Petition
Nos.31/2022, 32/2022, 33/2022, 34/2022 and 35/2022) allowed
Revision Petition Nos. 31/2022, 32/2022, 34/2022 and 35/2022
and dismissed Revision Petition No.33 of 2022. Learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner would submit that the only prayer
made by the petitioners is that the claim raised by the 1 st
respondent against the petitioners must be adjudicated only after
the documents (which were on record before the arbitrator) are
made available to them. It is also submitted that it is only after
copies of the documents are made available, the petitioners will
be in a position to defend the claim raised by the bank before the
arbitrator. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would
submit that the petitioners will be satisfied if this Court would
direct the respondents to make available the documents relied on
by the 1st respondent-bank (before the arbitrator) and a fresh
opportunity is given to the petitioners to have their case
adjudicated before the Arbitrator.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent bank
submits that the 1st respondent has no objection in providing
documents which form basis of the claim, to the petitioners.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent
bank and in view of the submissions made in this case, I am of
the view that the writ petition can be disposed of in the following
manner:-
(i) Ext.P8 order (in so far as it relates to Revision Petition
No.33 of 2022) and Ext.P6 award in ARC No.12 of 2020 are
quashed;
(ii) ARC 12 of 2020 is restored to the file of the Arbitrator
(Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies and Arbitrator,
Kerala State Co-operative Bank, Thiruvananthapuram Region)
with a direction to reconsider the claim, after ensuring that copies
of all documents relied on by the 1st respondent bank in the
proceedings are made available to the petitioners. The 1 st
petitioner is at liberty to adduce fresh evidence in the matter
based on the documents.
5. At this stage, my attention has been drawn to the
following direction in Ext.P6:-
''ഒന്നാം പ്രതിയുടെ പേരിൽ വാദി ബാങ്ക് നിലവിൽ ഫയൽ ചെയ്തിട്ടുള്ള മറ്റു
അന്യായങ്ങളുടെ വിചാരണ നടപടികളിൽ നിലവിലെ അഡ്വക്കേറ്റോ ടിയാന്റെ
പാനലിൽപെട്ട മറ്റു അഡ്വക്കേറ്റമാരോ ഹാജരാകുവാൻ അനുവദിക്കുന്നതല്ല
എന്നും ഇതിനാൽ ഉത്തരവാകുന്നു.''
The finding of the learned arbitrator (Assistant Registrar of Co-
operative Societies, Thiruvananthapuram) in Ext.P6 that she will
not permit any lawyer who appeared for the petitioners or any
other lawyers from the 'same panel' to appear before her in any
other proceedings is totally unsustainable and cannot be
countenanced in law. The Arbitrator has no authority to say so.
Advocates have the right, flowing from the provisions of the
Advocates Act, 1961, to appear before any court, including the
Supreme Court and also before any Tribunal or authority or
person legally authorised to take evidence. Section 30 of the
Advocates Act, 1961 reads as follows:-
''30. Right of advocates to practice.--Subject to provisions of
this Act, every advocate whose name is entered in the 1[State roll]
shall be entitled as of right to practice throughout the territories to
which this Act extends,--
i) in all courts including the Supreme Court;
(ii) before any tribunal or person legally authorized to take
evidence; and
(iii) before any other authority or person before whom such
advocate is by or under any law for the time being in force entitled
to practice.''
The Arbitrator will have due regard to the above provisions and will
refrain from passing any orders prohibiting any advocate or firm of
advocates from appearing in any proceedings before her.
The writ petition ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
ajt
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22287/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 12 OF
2020 DATED 12.2.2020 FILED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT ON THE FILES OF THE ARBITRATION
COURT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 05.06.2020 IN
ARC 12/2020 AS RECEIVED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER
HEREIN
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED
12.12.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS ALONG
WITH RESPONDENTS 2 TO 5 HEREIN ON THE FILES
OF THE ARBITRATION COURT
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 21.12.2020
SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER HEREIN ON THE
FILES OF THE ARBITRATION COURT
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLICATION DATED
10.03.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON
THE FILES OF THE ARBITRATION COURT
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD DATED 30.04.2021 IN
ARC NO. 12/2020 OF THE ARBITRATION COURT
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE R P NO. 33 OF 2022 FILED
BY THE PETITIONERS ON THE FILES OF THE KERALA
CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED
31.03.2023 IN R P NO. 31/2022 AND CONNECTED
CASES OF THE KERALA CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF THE LOAN
AVAILED FROM 1ST RESPONDENT BANK AND REPAID
BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BANK
Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS OF THE AMOUNT
REMITTED TOWARDS ARBITRATION FEES
