IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 21793 of 2002 Between: K.Ramesh Murthy, S/o.K.K.Murthy, R/o.Flat No.501, Kamala Nivas, Jaffar Ali Bagh, Saomjiguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Cooperative Sub-Registrar/Arbitraro, Office of the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies/OSD, Vasavi Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd., Malakpet, Hyderabad. 2 The Vasavi Cooperative Urban Bank Limited, Malakpet, Hyderabad. 3 K.Veeresh Murthy, S/o.K.K.Murthy, R/o.h.no.15-5-826, Afzul Gunj, Hyderabad. 4 Smt. Komala, W/o.k.R.Surendra, C/o.Sri T.R.Poornachandra Rao, R/o.H.no.15-9-132, 133, Maharaj Gunj, Gowliguda Chaman, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction especially a Writ of Mandamus by declaring the Award passed by the first respondent in ARC No.288/2000/OSD/VCUB T.L.A/c.No.246(SID), dated:23.11.2001 and the execution proceedings in E.P.No.43/2002 on the file of the first respondent herein viz., Cooperative Sub-Registrar/Arbitrator, Hyderabad and auction conducted by the first respondent, of the premises bearing Nos.15-9-132, 133, 133/1, 133/2, 133/3, 133/4, Maharaj Gunj, Gowliguda Chaman, Hyderabad as being illegal, unjust and null and void and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.R.V.NAGABUSHNAM RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following : HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO. 21793 of 2002 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the award passed by the first respondent dated 23.11.2001 and the execution proceedings in E.P.No.43 of 2002 on the file of first respondent and the auction conducted by the first respondent in respect of the premises covered by auction proceedings, as arbitrary, illegal and unjust. The petitioner suffered a decree in the hands of the arbitrator under the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act. His contention is that his liability was only to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/- though his property was kept with the second respondent by creating equitable mortgage. Therefore, he approached this Court contending that when his liability is only to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/-, the award passed by the first respondent-arbitrator for the whole amount making the petitioner jointly and severally liable to pay the amount is illegal and arbitrary. The arbitrator, after affording opportunity to all the parties to adduce evidence, both oral and documentary, came to the conclusion that the petitioner is jointly and severally liable to pay the entire debt amount. The petitioner did not prefer any appeal to the Cooperative Tribunal as provided under the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, but directly approached this Court through this Writ Petition invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court to quash the proceedings. But, since there is a decree passed by the arbitrator, which is equivalent to a civil Court decree for all practical purposes, the petitioner ought to have preferred an appeal before the Cooperative Tribunal to get the decree corrected, if there is any grievance about it. Inasmuch as the impugned order was passed after following the procedure prescribed under law, this Court sitting under Article 226 of Constitution of India, cannot test the factual position in this Writ Petition to adjudicate whether there is any arbitrariness in the impugned order passed by the arbitrator. The remedy available to the petitioner is to prefer an appeal before the Cooperative Tribunal. I am, therefore, of the view that the writ petition cannot be maintainable. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed, however, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order of the arbitrator before the Cooperative Tribunal by approaching the same. It is needless to mention that the Cooperative Tribunal will take into consideration the material available on record and pass appropriate orders according to law. The time taken to prosecute the writ petition before this Court may be excluded for the purpose of limitation from the date of filing the writ petition. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ Dr. G. YETHIRAJULU.J 26th FEBRUARY, 2008 Tsr. Copy To 1 Cooperative Sub-Registrar/Arbitrator, Office of the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies/OSD, Vasavi Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd., Malakpet, Hyderabad. 2 The Vasavi Cooperative Urban Bank Limited, Malakpet, Hyderabad.. 3. Two C.C.s to G.P. for Cooperation, High Court buildings, (OUT) 4. Two C.D. copies.