Jose Mathew vs Secretary To Government
2024 Latest Caselaw 14435 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 14435 Ker
Judgement Date : 31 May, 2024

Kerala High Court

Jose Mathew vs Secretary To Government on 31 May, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                      WP(C) NO. 18257 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          JOSE MATHEW
          AGED 57 YEARS
          S/O MATHEW, PUTHENPURAKKAL HOUSE, CHELAD. P.O,
          KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686691.
          BY ADVS.
          C.DILIP
          R.PRADEEP
          JIJO JOSEPH


RESPONDENTS:

    1    SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
         DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695001.
    2    ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
         (GENERAL)
         OFFICE OF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
         SOCIETIES, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.,
         PIN - 686691.
    3    SPECIAL SALE OFFICER
         KOTHAMANGALAM SCB LTD NO 583, OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
         REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOTHAMANGALAM,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686691.
    4    THE SECRETARY
         KOTHAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD 583,
         KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686691.
         BY ADVS.
         Murleekrishnan R
         D.KISHORE(K/000608/1993)
         SMT. MABLE C.KURIAN, SR.GP



THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
31.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.18257/2024
                                ..2..



                 DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
            =========================
                 W.P.(C)No.18257 of 2024
           ==========================
            Dated this the 31st day of May, 2024

                          JUDGMENT

The limited plea of the petitioner is that the 2nd

respondent - Arbitrator be directed to furnish him a copy of the

Award in ARC No.1009 of 2016. He says that, though he has

not been served with a certified copy of the afore Award, the

respondent - Bank appears to have filed E.P No.82 of 2020 to

execute the same; and therefore, that he has been put to

extreme prejudice. He says that, though he has requested the

Arbitrator for the award many times, it has not been heeded

to.

2. However, in response to the afore submissions of

Sri.C.Dilip - learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned

Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent -

Sri.R.Muraleekrishnan, submitted that, the petitioner's

assertion that, he has not received a copy of the Award does

not appear to be true, particularly when he admits that he has

received copy of the notice in E.P No.82 of 2020 filed by his

client. He argued that this is only a ruse adopted by the

..3..

petitioner to delay the proceedings; adding that, in any event,

since the Award was issued as early as in the year 2016, the

contention of the petitioner, as afore stated, is without any

force.

3. The learned Senior Government Pleader -

Smt.Mable C.Kurian, appearing for the 2 nd respondent,

submitted that, normally, after Awards are issued, they are

communicated to the parties by post, as per rules. She

submitted that, therefore, if the petitioner has a case that he

has not been favoured with such, then he must approach the

2nd respondent with an appropriate application, based on which

alone, the said Authority can decide whether it is liable to be

granted or otherwise.

4. I have no doubt that the afore submission of the

learned Senior Government Pleader is the most apposite in the

given circumstances because, the petitioner has not produced

any material to show that he had applied for the certified copy

of the Award from the Arbitrator, though he has made a

passing submission that he had made 'frequent requests

before the said respondent'(sic).

In the afore circumstances, this writ petition is disposed

of with the following directions:

..4..

a. I leave liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate

application before the 2nd respondent, or such other competent

Authority, who is the statutory Arbitrator, for a copy of the

Award in ARC No.1009/2016; and after if it is done within a

period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment, the said Authority will consider the same and issue

appropriate orders thereon - either acceding to it, or citing

reasons for not doing so - as expeditiously as is possible.

b. Needless to say, until such time as the afore is done

and the resultant Order/Award communicated to the petitioner,

all further recovery action based on Ext.P3 to P5 will stand

deferred; but can be taken forward after the said period,

however following due procedure and after affording necessary

opportunities to both sides.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE ACR

..5..

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18257/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF ACCOUNT DETAILS OF LOAN AVAILED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 27.10.2023.

Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF PLAINT DATED 31.10.2015 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE CUM ATTACHMENT ORDER OF MOVABLE PROPERTIES DATED 12.09.2023 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN E.P NO 82/2020 IN ARC NO 1009/2016.

Exhibit P4 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF SALE NOTICE OF MORTGAGED PROPERTY DATED 12.09.2023, ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT IN E.P NO

Exhibit P5 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF NOTICE DATED 09.05.2024 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT.