IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 21ST MAGHA 1930 RFA.No. 125 of 2007() --------------------- OSARB.16/1996 of SUB COURT,KOTTARAKKARA .................... APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF. ---------------------------------------- K.T.KURIAKOSE, S/O.KURIAN THOMAS, KARUTHEDATHU, THIRUVANIYOOR, PUTHENCRUZ. BY ADV. SRI.P.JACOB VARGHESE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.TOM JOSE (PADINJAREKARA) SRI.V.MANOJ KUMAR SRI.VARUGHESE M EASO RESPONDENT(S): DEFENDANTS. -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PROJECT III(KALLADA), KOTTARAKKARA. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KIP R.B.CIRCLE, KOTTARAKKARA. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/02/2009, ALONG WITH RFA NO. 126 OF 2007 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- R.F.A. Nos.125 & 126 of 2007 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 10th February, 2009. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. These appeals are filed by the plaintiff in O.S.(Arb) Nos.16/96 and 15/96 respectively on the file of the Sub Court, Kottarakkara. After having heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant for some time, we find that the appeals are not maintainable, in view of Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. Learned Senior Counsel hence prayed that the appeals may be converted as Civil Revision Petitions since the alternate remedy is to go for a revision. Having heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents also, we are of the view that it is for the appellant, if so advised, to file Civil Revision Petitions, subject to its maintainability. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the time the appeals were pending before this court may be excluded in filing these Civil Revision Petitions. Having regard to the fact that the appeals were pending before this court, it is only appropriate that the period between 2.3.2007 and this date is excluded in computing the period of limitation. Ordered accordingly. Subject to the liberty RFA NO.125 & 126/07 2 as above, these appeals are dismissed. The interlocutory applications in the appeals are also dismissed. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ ---------------------------------------------- R.F.A. Nos.125 & 126 of 2007 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 10th February, 2009.