IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2010 / 4TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 11304 of 2008(U) -------------------------- EP.144/2007 of MUNSIFF COURT,MUVATTUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK PAINGATTOOR BRANCH, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO LAW DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DARLY BABU, OORAKATTIL, THAZHUVAMKUNNU P.O., KALLOORKAD. 3. FRANCIS JOSEPH, 1/236, KARAKUNNEL, EAST KALOOR P.O., KALLOORKAD. 4. ULAHANNAN PAPPACHAN, PARUNTHAMPLACKAL, THAZHUVAMKUNNU PO, KALLOORKAD. 5. MARY MATHEW, ANANICKAL, PAINGATTOOR P.O. 6. BABU VARGHESE, OORAKATTIL, THAZHUVAMKUNNU PO. KALLOORKAD. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.B.RAMANAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).NO.11304/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE AWARD OF THE LOK ADALATH DATED 7.10.2006 IN PLP.NO.378/06. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER DATED 19.12.2007 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA IN E.P.NO.144/2007. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.11304 OF 2008 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Co-operative Bank. A dispute arising out of a loan extended by the petitioner Bank to respondents 2 to 6 was the subject matter of a dispute before the Lok Adalat constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, for short, the 'Act'. On settlement of that dispute, the Lok Adalat passed an award dated 7.10.2006. Petitioner bank, later, moved for execution of the award before the civil court, Munsiff Court, Muvattupuzha. Executability of the award passed by the Lok Adalat was challenged by the respondents 2 to 6 contending that without producing a certificate by the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies as contemplated under Section 76 (a) of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act, no proceedings in execution can be taken before the civil court. Petitioner bank contended that in view of Section 21 of the Act, the W.P.(C).11304/08 2 award passed by the Lok Adalat has to be deemed to be a decree passed by the civil court, and so much so, no certificate under Section 76 (a) of the Co-operative Societies Act was warranted to execute such award. The learned Munsiff, after examining the matter, concluded that a certificate under Section 76 (a) of the Co-operative Societies Act was essential to execute that award. In that view of the matter, the execution petition was dismissed vide Ext.P2 order. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Perusing Ext.P2 order impugned in the writ petition with reference to the submissions made and also taking note of the relevant provisions under the Act and also Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, I find, no impropriety or illegality in the order passed by the learned Munsiff declining to execute the award without W.P.(C).11304/08 3 production of a certificate issued by the Registrar under the Section 76 (a) of that Act. Indisputably, a dispute of the nature canvassed could not have been taken cognizance by way of a suit by the civil court in view of the provision under Section 69 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act. That being so, the award passed by the Lok Adalat in the matter has to be examined with reference to its competency and jurisdiction of the authority to entertain the dispute involved. Needless to point out, that a dispute which was covered under Section 2 (d) of the Co-operative Societies Act, which is outside the ambit of jurisdiction of the civil court, unless it involves and takes in a dispute relating to the immovable property as covered under Section 100 of that Act, can be adjudicated and decided only by the statutory authority covered under the Co-operative Societies Act. In the present case, the dispute was relating to failure to discharge a loan availed from the bank strictly falling as a dispute to be W.P.(C).11304/08 4 determined only by the statutory authority under the Co-operative Societies Act. A suit in relation to that dispute was clearly outside the jurisdiction of the civil court, but, such a dispute would lie before the statutory authority covered by that Act. When a Lok Adalat exercises jurisdiction over that dispute, it was exercising a jurisdiction vested with the statutory authority under the Act namely, the Registrar of the Co- operative Societies Act. An award passed by the Registrar over such a dispute for its execution before the civil court has necessarily to be accompanied by a certificate under Section 76 (a) of the Co-operatives Societies Act. That being so, there is no error, leave alone any incorrectness in Ext.P2 order passed by the learned Munsiff holding that the award of the Lok Adalat cannot be executed without production of a certificate under Section 76 (a) of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act. So much so, no interference with Ext.P2 order is called for. Writ petition is disposed W.P.(C).11304/08 5 of reserving the right of the petitioner to produce the certificate of the Registrar for executing the award of the Lok Adalat moving fresh execution petition in accordance with law. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp //true copy//