IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28817 of 2011(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE RUBBER MARKETTING FEDERATION LTD;P.B NO.15, GANDHI NAGAR,KOCHI 682 020, REP.BY MANAGING DIRECTOR BY ADV. SRI.JAGAN GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. M/S.KUTTIKAD FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK.572,P.O.KUTTIKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 2. THE REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRARS OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM GP SRI.MUHAMMED SHAH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 28817 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT NUMBERED AS ARC NO.2/2009 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN ARC NO.2/2009 EXT.P3 COPY OF THE AWARD JOINT REGISTRAR,THRISSUR DATED 22/7/2009 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION FILED BY THE PETITIONER NUMBERED AS R.P NO.112/2011 DATED 14/10/2011 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY ORDER DATED 22/10/2011 OF THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. (True copy) P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).28817/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an Apex Society under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, (in short 'the Act') and the first respondent herein is a Service Co-operative Bank. The first respondent made certain deposits with the petitioner and claiming refund of the amount due, the first respondent filed an application in which the second respondent passed Ext.P3 order, directing payment of the amount due. Aggrieved by this order, raising various contentions, the petitioner filed Ext.P4 Revision before the Tribunal invoking its powers under Section 84 of the Act. While considering the application made by the petitioner for stay of the impugned order, Tribunal passed Ext.P5 order granting stay, on condition that the petitioner pays an amount of Rs.10 Lakhs on or before 28.10.2011. It is this order which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Admittedly the amounts are due to the first respondent and although the petitioner has pleaded that the deposits stand renewed till 2017, nothing has been placed on record to W.P.(C).28817/11 2 substantiate this contention. It was in such circumstances, that exercising its discretionary power, the first respondent has imposed the condition of payment of Rs.10 Lakhs for granting stay. Such discretionary order cannot said to be perverse warranting interference. 3. However, fact remains that this order is dated 22.10.2011 and the petitioner was ordered to pay Rs.10 Lakhs on or before 28.10.2011. Having regard to the paucity of time, the payment of such substantial amount would cause prejudice to the petitioner and can even affect its activities. Therefore, I am inclined to think that the time specified for payment is too short and should be enlarged. In that view of the matter, I direct that Ext.P5, to the extent payment is ordered to be made on or before 28.10.2011, will stand modified and the petitioner will be permitted to pay Rs.10 Lakhs in two equal instalments of Rs.5 Lakhs each, which shall be paid on or before 11.11.2011 and 25.11.2011 respectively. Subject to such modification, Ext.P5 will stand confirmed. W.P.(C).28817/11 3 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs