IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2010 / 26TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 25465 of 2009(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MALAYALAM CINE TECHNICIANS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.4456, BUILDING NO.35/298A, PRADAKSHINA VAZHI, THAMMANAM PALLINADA, PALARIVATTOM PO.PIN.682 025 REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, NADIRSHAH @ PATTANAM SHAH, AGED 50,S/O.HUSSAIN, PATTANAM H.TOG ROAD, KALAMASSERY,ERNAKULAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR SRI.P.VISWANATHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SRI.B.LAL MONAN, AGED 58 C/O.DR,.C.P. BALARAMAN, SCIENTIFIC ADVISOR TO THE CHIEF OF NAVAL STAFF, INTEGRATED HEAD QUARTERS, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE (NAVY),ROOM NO.7, WING-1,WEST BLCOK IV, R.K.PURAM, NEW DELHI 110 066. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.CHANDRASENAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPC.25465/09 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE BYELAW OF THE PETITIONER SOCIETY. EXT.P2: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 7.4.2008 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE KERALA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT. EXT.P4: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ATTACHMENT. EXT.P5: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 8.7.2009 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(A): THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.25TH JUNE, 2008 SENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.R2(B): THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE SENT BY THE RESPONDENT DT.28TH DAY OF JULY, 2008. /TRUE COPY/ THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.25465 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner filed an arbitration case before the arbitrator under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act for adjudicating, what the petitioner society calls is, a monetary claim. The arbitrator has issued Ext.P5 letter addressed to the Secretary of the petitioner society saying that the arbitration case filed under Section 69 of the KCS Act is being returned since it cannot be entertained. The sustainability of a particular dispute as one that could be adjudicated under Section 69 of the Act is an issue that the arbitrator whose jurisdiction is invoked has to decide. The authority which issued Ext.P5 does not have a case that it is not one vested with the power under Section 69 of the Act. Obviously therefore, there has to be an award even on the question of maintainability. If it is the view of the arbitrator that the dispute as raised is not one covered by the provisions of the KCS Act, it may then be open to the petitioner or any other person aggrieved by that decision to seek appropriate statutory WPC.25465/09 2 remedies or even go to appropriate courts where such issues can be raised. The fundamental ground in attacking Ext.P5 is that it is cryptic as it does not state any reason for the said decision and the same does not accordingly stand. Without stating anything further, Ext.P5 is quashed and the first respondent is directed to take up the arbitration case filed by the petitioner as and when it is presented following this judgment and decide as to the maintainability of that matter initially, after hearing the petitioner and also, if necessary, the second respondent. Let that be done within a period of two months of the presentation of the said arbitration case following this judgment, provided it is presented within a period of two months of the issuance of the certified copy of this judgment. It is clarified that this judgment is not expressing anything on the merits of the matter. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.19/08.