IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2010 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36984 of 2010(W) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M.BHAMAMANIAMMA, PADMALANE, NERIAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM-686 693. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANJAY SMT.A.PARVATHI MENON SRI.BIJU MEENATTOOR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR/SECRETARY, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM. PIN-695 014. 2. THE ASST.REGISTRAR (GEN.) OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOTHAMANGALAM (ARBITRATOR IN ARC NO.783/89). PIN-686 022. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 36984 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T This writ petition has been filed on being aggrieved by the delay in the matter of issuing of certified copy of the award in ARC No. 783/1989 which was filed by the petitioner. Admittedly, against the said award two appeals were preferred. One of the appeals was filed by the petitioner himself. Subsequent to the passing of an order by the appellate authority the petitioner has approached the second respondent with an application for certified copy of the award for initiating execution proceedings. Despite the receipt of the application no steps have been taken by the second respondent for issuing the certified copy of the award. According to the second respondent, he has already forwarded the entire files pertaining to ARC No.783/89 before the first respondent. The first respondent maintained the stand that the records could be remitted back only in case it is requested by the second respondent. In short, only on account of the inaction on the part of the respondents that the petitioner is disabled from taking WPC.36984/2010 : 2 : steps for execution of the award. In view of the order I propose to pass in this writ petitioner, I do not think it necessary to issue notice to respondents 1 and 2. 2. When an application for issuance of certified copy of an award is filed before the arbitration Court, the applicant is entitled to obtain the certified copy especially, when it is sought for the purpose of executing an award that was passed in favour of the applicant. It is evident from the facts expatiated above that the entire records are now with the first respondent and that the first respondent is not remitting back the files. According to the first respondent no proper request for that purpose was made by the second respondent. Be that as it may, the second respondent has to take appropriate steps for the purpose of issuing copy of the award in ARC No.783/89 to enable the petitioner to initiate execution proceedings. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to take appropriate steps, including making appropriate requisition before the first respondent, for issuing certified copy of the award in ARC No. 783/89 to the petitioner expeditiously. At any rate, after complying with such formalities the petitioner shall be given certified copy of the award in ARC WPC.36984/2010 : 3 : No.783/89 within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge