IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2010 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 18860 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.S.ANANDAMANI, S/O.SUBRAMANIYA IYAR, KURUVATTOOR MADAM P.O., THIRUVAZHIYOOR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP SRI.LIJOY P.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., P.B.NO.21, H.P.O.ROAD, SULTHANPET, PALAKKAD 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 2. THE SPECIAL SALES OFFICER, PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PALAKKAD. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, PALAKKAD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: dmb WP(C).No. 18860 of 2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.2.2008 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT BANK P2: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 4.3.2008 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR CO-OPERATION P4: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 7.5.2010 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT P5: COPY OF THE AWARD PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT IN ARC.NO.271/2009 FORWARDED TO THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH EXHIBIT P4 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- R3(a): COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF DESPATCH REGISTER R3(b): COPY OF THE SUMMONS DATED 12.9.2009 //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No. 18860 OF 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 1st day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner availed a loan of ` 2 lakhs from the first respondent Bank in the year 1998. But the repayments could not be effected on time, which made the petitioner a defaulter. In the said circumstances, the Bank proceeded with further steps for recovery of the due amount, by filing ARC 271 of 2009, which culminated in Ext. P5 Award . The petitioner is virtually challenging Ext. P5 Award and other incidental proceedings, also contending that the petitioner was not served with the copy of the Award till Ext. P4 notice was issued to him. 2. The case projected by the petitioner is vehemently opposed by the respondents, referring to the counter affidavit filed from the part of the third respondent, seeking to sustain the course and events and asserting that the Writ Petition is devoid of any merit or bonafides. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that, if the petitioner is aggrieved in any manner, there is an effective alternate remedy under the Statute, by way of revision. 3. In the above circumstances, this Court does not propose to go into the merits of the case and Writ Petition is disposed of, reserving the W.P. (C) No. 18860 of 2010 2 rights and liberties of the petitioner to challenge Ext. P5 Award, if aggrieved, by pursuing the alternate remedy as provided under the Statute, if so advised. However, so as to enable the petitioner to pursue such exercise, the coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one month. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd