Kerala High Court
Pennamma Raghavan vs Special Sale Officer on 21 May, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 11829 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
PENNAMMA RAGHAVAN
AGED 72 YEARS
WIFE OF LATE RAGHAVAN, KOCHILAMKUNNEL HOUSE, KONGANDOOR
PO, AYARKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686564
BY ADVS.
ANANTHAKRISHNAN A. KARTHA
ANIL D.KARTHA
SURESH G.
SHARATH ELDO PHILIP
SREEKUMAR G.
ANANTHASANKAR A. KARTHA
RESPONDENTS:
1 SPECIAL SALE OFFICER
KODIMATHA SCB GROUP, ASST. REGISTRAR (G) OFFICE,
KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686002
2 AYARKUNNOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
AYARKUNNOM, KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN -
686564
BY ADVS.
P.ANTO THOMAS(K/911/2009)
SRI ANZAR BASHEER-R1
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 11829 OF 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Even though various allegations, averments
and assertions that have been made and urged in
this writ petition, when this matter was called
today, Sri.Ananthakrishnan A.Kartha - the learned
counsel for the petitioner, conceded that his
client has suffered an Award in a proceedings
before the jurisdictional Joint Registrar, under
Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies
Act and that he intends to challenge the same.
The learned counsel, therefore, prayed that
Exts.P2 and P3 be interdicted for a short while,
so as to allow his client "breathing time" to
initiate and invoke his available remedies
against the Award.
2. The learned Standing Counsel for the
respondents - Sri.Anzar Basheer, opposed the
WP(C) NO. 11829 OF 2024
afore plea saying that nothing stopped the
petitioner from invoking remedies against the
Award and that he need not have approached this
Court to seek any such relief.
3. I must say that there is force in the
afore submissions of Sri.Anzar Basheer because,
even in the memorandum of this writ petition, the
petitioner unequivocally admits that an Award had
been issued against him in Arbitration Case
No.755/2022. In fact, he has averred that he does
not have a copy of the same and that he will
produce it as and when it is received by him.
4. It is, therefore, obvious that the
petitioner is aware of the Award against him, and
as rightly argued by the respondents, does not
require any orders from this Court to initiate
remedies against it, if he is so advised.
WP(C) NO. 11829 OF 2024
5. However, that said, since this writ
petition has been pending before this Court for
some time, I am of the view that the petitioner
must be given the benefit of being able to invoke
his remedies, without imminent action; for which
Exts.P2 and P3 must be interdicted for a short
period of time. I record that the learned counsel
for the respondent did not oppose this, but
sought that the time fixed be short.
In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ
petition, without acceding to any of the reliefs
sought for by the petitioner; however, ordering
that further action pursuant to Exts.P2 and P3
will stand deferred for a period of three weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment.
I clarify that this is intended only to allow
WP(C) NO. 11829 OF 2024
the petitioner an opportunity to invoke his
remedies against the Award, but that this Court
has not entered into the merits of any of the
rival contentions and that all of them are left
open.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
SAS
WP(C) NO. 11829 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11829/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 04-
05-2015 ISSUED BY THE PALA MUNICIPALITY
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 07-02-2024
BEARING NO. 3828/23 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 A RUE COPY OF THE NOTICE IN EA NO. 3828/23
DATED 05-03-2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
