Thomas P.P vs The Assistant Registrar
2024 Latest Caselaw 31238 Ker

Kerala High Court

Thomas P.P vs The Assistant Registrar on 1 November, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

                                              2024:KER:81399

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1946

                     RP NO. 1037 OF 2024

        AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.30097 OF 2024

                   OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

           THOMAS P.P
           AGED 75 YEARS, S/O. PATHROSE,
           PULIKKAL HOUSE, EZHAKARANAD KARA,
           MANEED VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,
           ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
           REPRESENTED BY HIS WIFE AND NEXT FRIEND
           SARAMMA THOMAS, AGED 66 YEARS, PULIKKAL HOUSE,
           EZHAKARANAD KARA, MANEED VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA
           TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-, PIN - 682308


           BY ADVS.
           PAUL K.VARGHESE
           A.A.GEETHA




RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

    1      THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
           (SPECIAL SALES OFFICER/ ARBITRATOR),
           OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
           SOCIETIES (GENERAL), MUVATTUPUZHA,
           ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682308.
 R.P.No.1037 of 2024 in
W.P.(C) No.30097 of 2024
                           :2:             2024:KER:81399

    2    THE MANEED SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
         E59, MANEED P.O., PIRAVOM,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN - 682308
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
         BINU K. VARGHESE.

    3    SIVADAS P.R
         AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR,
         PARIYARATH HOUSE, MANEED VILLAGE,
         MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM - 682308.

    4    KURIAKOSE, M.M
         AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. MATHAI,
         MUTHATTUKUZHIYL HOUSE, EZHAKARANAD KARA,
         MANEED VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682308.

         BY ADV.SRI.SUNU P. JOHN, STANDING COUNSEL

     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 R.P.No.1037 of 2024 in
W.P.(C) No.30097 of 2024
                                :3:              2024:KER:81399




                           ORDER

Dated this the 1st day of November, 2024

W.P.(C) Nos.30097 of 2024 and 30005 of 2024 came

up for admission on the same day. W.P.(C) No.30005 of 2024

was disposed of in the forenoon. Subsequently, W.P.(C)

No.30097 of 2024 also was disposed of.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as this

Court followed a judgment in the earlier writ petition, in

paragraph No.4 of the judgment in W.P.(C) No.30097 of 2024, it

was noted that the petitioner had participated in the Arbitral

proceedings. It is a factual mistake. The petitioner was ex-parte

in the Arbitral proceedings. Therefore, there is an error apparent

on the face of the record and the judgment is liable to be

reviewed.

R.P.No.1037 of 2024 in

:4: 2024:KER:81399

3. I have perused the pleadings. It is true that the

petitioner remained ex-parte in the ARC No.431 of 2022.

However, the relief granted in the judgment will not affect in any

manner by correcting the factual error.

In view of the above, the revision petition is allowed.

The judgment in the writ petition will stand corrected as follows:-

Paragraph No.4 of the judgment in W.P.(C) No.30097

of 2024 is deleted and paragraph Nos.5 to 7 are

renumbered as paragraph Nos.4 to 6.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE ams