IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH SATURDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2007 / 27TH SRAVANA 1929 WP(C).No. 20606 of 2007(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.M.SAINUDEEN, S/O MEERAN, KUNNUMPURATH HOUSE, ADIVADU, PALLARIMANGALAM P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. MARAMPALLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.E 265, MARAMPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.K.RAVIKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 20606 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of August, 2007 JUDGMENT Ext.P9 is challenged by the petitioner. One of the contentions taken by the petitioner is that petitioner was not heard when Ext.P9 was passed. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent-Bank besides the learned Government Pleader. There is no dispute that the petitioner was not heard when Ext.P9 order was passed. In such circumstances, I feel that Ext.P9 cannot be sustained and Ext.P9 is to be quashed. Accordingly, Ext.P9 is quashed. The second respondent will consider the matter afresh and take a decision in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner and the first respondent within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. I am leaving open the other contentions of the parties. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) sv.