Kerala High Court
T.R.Muraleedharan vs Deputy Director on 29 October, 2025
W.A.No.2529 of 2025
: 1 :-
2025:KER:80878
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 7TH KARTHIKA, 1947
WA NO. 2529 OF 2025
(AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 23.05.2025 IN WP(C)
NO.37096 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA)
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
T.R.MURALEEDHARAN
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O T.K.RAGHAVAN NAIR, THOTTUPURATH HOUSE,
NAYAKKAPADI, KOTTATHARA POST, AGALI, MANNARKKAD,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678581
BY ADVS.
SHRI.P.N.MOHANAN
SRI.C.P.SABARI
SMT.AMRUTHA SURESH
SHRI.GILROY ROZARIO
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 DEPUTY DIRECTOR
DIARY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, CIVIL STATION,
PALAKKAD., PIN - 678541
2 CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, JAWAHAR
SAHAKARANABHAVAN, VAZHUTHACAUD - POOJAPPURA RD, DPI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695001
3 ATTAPPADY KSHEEROLPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGAM
W.A.No.2529 of 2025
: 2 :-
2025:KER:80878
LTD.NO.P-558 (D) APCOS, KOTTATHARA POST, AGALI,
MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.,
PIN - 678581
4 THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF ATTAPPADY KSHEEROLPADAKA
SAHAKARANA SANGAM
LTD.NO.P-558 (D) APCOS, KOTTATHARA POST, AGALI,
MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD,REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.,
PIN - 678581
ADV.K.P.HARISH (SR.G.P.) FOR R1
ADV.N.RAGHURAJ (SR.) R3 & R4
ADV.VIVEK MENON
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
27.10.202 THE COURT ON 29.10.2025, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2529 of 2025
: 3 :-
2025:KER:80878
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,
&
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN,JJ.
-------------------------------------
W.A. No.2529 of 2025
---------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of October 2025
JUDGMENT
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN,J
This intra-court appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C)
No.37096 of 2024, challenging the judgment dated 23.5.2025
dismissing his writ petition.
2. The facts in brief, as are necessary for the disposal of this writ
appeal, are as follows:
The appellant, while working as Secretary of Attappadi
Ksheerolpadaka Co-operative Society, was dismissed from service for
misappropriating funds of the society. The appellant challenged the
same and as per the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C)
No.24390/2013, was reinstated in service on 31.10.2022. In the
meanwhile, the 3rd respondent Society filed ARC No.3/2008 before the
first respondent to realise a sum of Rs.10,96,616/- from the
appellant. The proceedings ultimately culminated in passing of Ext.P4
award dated 23.11.2020 for realising a sum of Rs.5,01,355.86 along
with 9% interest from the appellant. Against the said award, the
appellant preferred an appeal before the Co-operative Tribunal and
: 4 :-
2025:KER:80878
the same also ended in dismissal as per Ext.P5 order dated
05.08.2024. Subsequently, Ext.P6-E.P.No.32/2023 in ARC No.3/2008
was filed before the Sub Court, Ottappalam for realising the amount
and the same is now pending. It is in such circumstances, the
appellant approached this Court by filing the writ petition seeking
quashment Exts.P4, P5 and P6 .
3. The learned Single Judge after considering the materials on
record and hearing both sides, dismissed the writ petition on
23.05.2025.
4. Heard Adv.P.N.Mohanan, the learned counsel appearing for
the appellant, Sri.N.Reghuraj, the learned senior counsel appearing
for respondents 3 and 4 and Adv.K.P.Harish, the learned Senior
Government Pleader appearing for the 1st respondent.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the
entire proceedings, leading to the passing of the award and its
confirmation in the appeal, was in the absence of pleadings regarding
as to how the appellant is liable. He submitted that both the Arbitrator
and the Co-operative Tribunal, without considering this relevant fact
decided against the appellant, thereby directing to realise a
substantial amount from him.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4
: 5 :-
2025:KER:80878
supported the impugned judgment and contended that there are no
grounds to interfere with it. He argued that the contention taken by
the appellant regarding lack of pleadings was projected for the first
time in the writ petition and there was no such contention taken
before the Arbitrator and before the Co-operative Tribunal. He
submitted that Ext.P1 is the plaint in the Arbitration case and there
are specific pleadings with regard to the role of the appellant and the
loss caused by the acts committed by him, while functioning as the
Secretary of the 3rd respondent society.
7. On an anxious consideration of the rival submissions and the
materials on record, we find no merit in the contention raised by the
appellant. A perusal of Ext.R3(a), the copy of the objection filed by
the appellant before the Arbitrator and Ext.R3(b), the appeal
memorandum filed by the appellant before the Tribunal, would clearly
show that there is not even a whisper regarding lack of pleadings in
the plaint as regards the role of the appellant and the loss caused to
the Society by his overt acts. It is further to be seen that the
contention of the appellant that, the plaint in the arbitration case lack
necessary pleadings, is also devoid of merits, since paragraphs 2 and
3 of Ext.P1 plaint clearly shows that there are specific pleadings with
regard to the loss caused to the Society by the appellant. Thus, it can
: 6 :-
2025:KER:80878
be seen that the appellant has raised the contention regarding the
lack of pleadings only for the first time in the writ petition. If so, in
the light of the afore discussions, we do not find any ground to
interfere with the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single
Judge.
Ergo, we find no merit in this writ appeal and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
Judge
Sd/-
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN
Judge
dpk
