The Palakkad Service ... vs Mohammed Subair M.H
2023 Latest Caselaw 650 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
  THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 22ND POUSHA,
                               1944
                        RP NO. 1052 OF 2022
        AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 13126/2021 DATED
           26.07.2022    OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT NOS. 3 & 4:
    1     THE PALAKKAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED
          NO. F1200,
          HEAD OFFICE,GANDHI BAZAR ROAD,
          PALAKKAD - 678 001,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.


    2       THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF PALAKKAT SERVICE CO-
            OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO. F 1200
            HEAD OFFICE, GANDHI BAZAR ROAD,
            PALAKKAD - 678 001,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.


            BY ADV ARUN CHANDRAN

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NOS.1 & 2:
    1    MOHAMMED SUBAIR M.H
         AGED 43 YEARS
         S/O., MOHAMMED HUSSAIN
         KALLAMKULAM HOUSE, KUTHANNUR P.O.,
         PALAKKAD - 678 721.
    2       KERALA CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL
            JAWAHAR SAHAKARANA BHAVAN, DPI JUNCTION,
            THYCAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.,
    3       CO-OPERATIVE ARBITRATION COURT (NORTHERN)
            SAHAKARANA BHAVAN, PUTHIYARA , KOZHIKODE - 673
            004.
            BY ADVS.
            B.ASHOK SHENOY
 RP NO. 1052 OF 2022

                           2


      THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 RP NO. 1052 OF 2022

                               3



                          ORDER

This petition, seeking review of the judgment of this

Court dated 26.07.2022, has been impelled by the petitioner

Society on the ground that, they had not received notice from

this Court and had not authorised Sri.M.Sasindran - learned

counsel, to appear on their behalf.

2. Sri. Arun Chandran - learned counsel for the

petitioner, pointed out that the name of Sri.M.Sasindran was

shown in the cause list in error because he was representing

a similarly named entity, but is not the Standing Counsel for

the petitioner herein. He pointed out that it is to an

inadvertent error that service had been recorded to be

completed in his client on the files of this case. He thus

prayed that this Review Petition be allowed.

3. I have examined the materials on record, as also

the various orders passed by this Court earlier.

4. It is without doubt that a learned Judge of this

Court had declared service on the petitioner - Society,

recording that they are represented by Sri.M.Sasindran, their

learned counsel. However, it is now stated and without

contest that Sri.M.Sasindran was not the Standing Counsel RP NO. 1052 OF 2022

for the petitioner.

5. I am, therefore of the view that this Court will be

justified in allowing this Review Petition and rehearing the

matter, which I proceed to do with the consent of both sides.

This Review Petition is thus allowed and judgment dated

26.07.2022 in WP(C) No.13126 of 2021 is recalled.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE lsn RP NO. 1052 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF RP 1052/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure - A I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.

(C) 13126 OF 2021 DATED 26.07.2022 Annexure - A II TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE KERALA CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 12.10.2022

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE

LSN