IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 33158 of 2009(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- FR.PROVINCIAL, SAINT THOMAS CAPACHIN PROVINCE, P.B.NO.63, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, THAIKATTUKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.E.761, THAIKATTUKARA, ALUVA-6. SR.GOVT. PLEADER K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.33158 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 19th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a church. They had some deposit with the 2nd respondent bank. That church was bifurcated into two. The church wanted to renew the fixed deposits, which was not acceded to by the 2nd respondent. The petitioner approached the 1st respondent-Joint Registrar, who passed Ext.P6 order, directing the 2nd respondent to renew the deposit on the church producing appropriate documents to prove the bifurcation and separate holding of assets. The 2nd respondent did not comply with the same. The petitioner again approached the Joint Registrar who issued Ext.P11. The petitioner now seeks a direction to the 2nd respondent to comply with Exts.P6 and P11 and also a direction to the 1st respondent to direct the 2nd respondent to implement the same. I am of opinion that in view of the Division Bench decision of this Court in Kallettumkara Service Co-operative Bank v. Registrar of Co- operative Societies [2005 (3) KLT 483], the Joint Registrar of Co- operative Societies does not have power to issue orders like Exts.P6 and P11 in respect of the contractual matters between the Bank and its customers not involving any provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules. That being so, the 2nd respondent is not 2 bound to comply with the those directions if they are not willing to. If Exts.P6 and P11 are not binding on the 2nd respondent, then this writ petition is not maintainable in so far as the 2nd respondent has not violated any provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules. On the other hand, the transaction between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent is purely contractual in nature. In such circumstances, the remedy of the petitioner lies in approaching the arbitrator under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. Without prejudice to such right of the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge