IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2009 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 8496 of 2009(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SATHYAN, S/O.KUTTAPPAN VAIDYAR, KANDANATTU HOUSE, KAYPAMANGALAM (PO) THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.60, SAHAKARANA SATHABDHI MANDIRAM TUDA ROAD, THRISSUR - 22. REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.60, PERINJANAM BRANCH, PERINJANAM (PO). 3. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR/SPECIAL SALEOFFICER, THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.60, SAHAKARANA SATHABDHI MANDIRAM TUDA ROAD, THRISSUR - 22. 4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), THRISSUR. 5. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SC SRI P C SASIDHARAN BY GP SRI K C SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 8496 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner suffered an arbitration award under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act in 2001. That is put in execution. Any dispute relating to applicability of any of the circulars issued by the Registrar, which may be binding on first respondent and the fixation of the actual amounts that may be due in execution on the basis of those circulars, is a matter relating to the discharge, execution and satisfaction of the arbitration award. This, therefore, is a matter which could be adequately adjudicated and appropriately decided at the hands of the third respondent, executing authority, viz, the Sale Officer. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek such relief and preserving his contentions on the basis of the circulars issued by the Registrar, this writ petition is dismissed, since the intervention of this court is not necessary in the wake of availability of efficacious alternate remedy as noticed above. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/20/3