IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2009 / 1ST SRAVANA 1931 RP.No. 624 of 2009(H) ------------------------------ (THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.4700/2009 DTD. 12/02/2009) .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/ 1ST RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------------------ N.N.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR NOORACHERIL, VALLICHIRA KARA AND VILLAGE, PALA EDANADU PO, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.BABU KUMAR. RESPONDENT/PETITIONER – RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. EDANADU PRIVATE SCHOOLS STAFF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,NO.K-333, EDANADU P.O, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, K.SREEKUMAR, PATTETTU HOUSE, EDANADU KARA, VALLICHIRA VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK,KOTTAYAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MEENACHIL, PALA. 4. ARBITRATION AND EXECUTIVE INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE ASST. REGISTRAR (GENERAL), CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MEENACHIL, PALA. 5. M.P.SUKUMARIAMMA, NOORACHERIL, VALLICHIRA KARA AND VILLAGE , PALA, EDANADU PO, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 6. K.S.MOHANAN NAIR, KARINTHAKKARAMYALILL, VALLICHIRA KARA AND VILLAGE , PALA, EDANADU PO, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. R.P. NO. 624/2009-H: 7. JIJI MATHEW, VAVALKUNNEL HOUSE, NECHIPUZHOOR KARA, LALAM VILLAGE, PALA, EDANADU P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 8. EDANADU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.1768, EDANADU P.O,PALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 BY ADV. MR. P.C. HARIDAS. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- R.P.No.624 OF 2009 IN W.P(C).No.18528 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2009 O R D E R 1.The petitioner is the 4th respondent in W.P(C).4700/09. He had availed a facility from the writ petitioner, the first respondent herein. The writ petition was filed by the co-operative society alleging that the statutory authority is not taking appropriate action on its request for execution of arbitration awards passed under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. To avoid unnecessary expenditure for the private respondents in that writ petition, notice to them were dispensed with and it was ordered that the execution proceeding be completed within a period of six months. Obviously, a right of hearing was left open if respondents in the writ petition desire to have it. 2.This review petition is filed on the premise that following the directions in the writ petition, the statutory authorities initiated steps and has attached the pensionary benefits of the RP.624/09 Page numbers review petitioner, however, that he had even earlier settled off the entire claims due to the society. The plea raised by the review petitioner may require consideration. The judgment in the writ petition does not stand in the way of considering such a plea. This is because all that has been done as per the judgment sought to be reviewed is to direct the statutory authority to do its duty under the legislations. This does not preclude any party from taking his/her legitimate defence. It does not also give a mantle to any party to push through something which is not otherwise available in law. Therefore, any person who says that he has satisfied the arbitration award, which is deemed to be a decree for the purpose of execution, is entitled to move the sale officer for an order of due discharge and satisfaction of the award. The judgment sought to be reviewed does not stand in the way of such a course of action. 3.In the aforesaid circumstances, this review petition is ordered clarifying that the judgment sought to be reviewed will not RP.624/09 Page numbers stand in the way of the petitioner moving the sale officer or other authority executing the award as against the review petitioner, for an order that he had paid off the entire amount and that nothing more is due from him to the society. Once such orders are issued, any restraint order passed against any monies due to the petitioner will be immediately lifted and such monies released to the petitioner. Let this be done by considering any request of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the writ petition and a representation in the light of what is stated above. The sale officer will pass orders after hearing the petitioner herein and the first respondent, the creditor society. It is also clarified that all issues inter se the judgment debtors under the award are left open. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.24/7.