IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2009 / 11TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 16835 of 2005(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.SREENARAYANA, S/O.A.K.NAIR, AGED 31 YEARS, MARUTHAMPADATHU HOUSE, KAZHANI CHUNGAM, KAVASSERY VILLAGE, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PALAKKADU DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., ALATHUR BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER & ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PALAKKADU DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, PALAKKADU 1. 3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.K.RAVIKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.16835 OF 2005 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT The first respondent obtained an arbitration award against the petitioner under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. This writ petition is filed claiming that the petitioner is not liable to pay the entire amount fixed for recovery in view of the circulars issued by the third respondent Registrar, extending benefits by way of One Tine Settlement etc. It is also pointed out by the petitioner that such OTS schemes and other beneficial schemes apply also to cases where awards have been passed. Obviously therefore, the question that would arise is as to whether the petitioner has to pay the entire amount covered by the arbitration award, including interest at the rate fixed thereby or whether he is entitled to discharge his liability under the award by paying lesser amount. With the passage of time, the petitioner has paid the entire amount as demanded by the first respondent to save the property from distress action. Therefore, WPC.16835/05 Page numbers the question that would continue to remain is as to whether there is due discharge, execution and satisfaction of the arbitration award or whether there is excessive execution in violation of any binding circulars. Matters relating to execution, discharge and satisfaction, including excessive execution and if necessary, sufficient restitutionary measures, are matters which can be handled by the executing officer, viz., the second respondent. This is all the more so because the proper consideration and decision on the plea of the petitioner requires calculation of the amount that would be actually due on proper reconciliation of payments already made as against the total outstandings and also by the due application of appropriate circulars, if any, applicable. Hence, this writ petition is ordered directing the second respondent to hear the petitioner and the first respondent and take a decision in the light of what is stated above, within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner and the first respondent will be at liberty to place statement of accounts, WPC.16835/05 Page numbers which, according to them, would justify the reconciliation as aforesaid. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.1/1.