Kerala High Court
K.P.Varghese vs Cochin Shipyard Staff Co-Operative ... on 6 October, 2012
Author: V.Chitambaresh
Bench: V.Chitambaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/23RD PHALGUNA, 1935
OP(C).No. 4238 of 2012 (O)
-------------------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER IN RP 59/2012 OF KERALA CO-OPERATIVE
TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 06-10-2012
....................................................
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
K.P.VARGHESE, AGED 50 YEARS
SON OF SRI.PAULOSE, RESIDING AT A-43, ASOKA APARTMENTS
KOVILVATTOM ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 031
BY ADVS.SRI.V.R.VENKATAKRISHNAN (SR.ADVOCATE)
SRI.C.S.DIAS
SRI.K.JOSE KURIAKOSE
SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
COCHIN SHIPYARD STAFF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE CONSTRUCTION
SOCIETY LTD. NO.E 346, ERNAKULAM
KOCHI-682 015, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
R1 BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH
SRI.PAUL C THOMAS
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-03-2014,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
DCS
OP(C).No. 4238 of 2012 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT-P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN ARC NO.24 OF 2010 DATED 17-2-2010
ON THE FILE OF THE ARBITRATOR
EXHIBIT-P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 14-7-2010 BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR
EXHIBIT-P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 22-3-2012 PASSED BY
THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC.NO.6730 OF 2012
EXHIBIT-P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT
DATED 30-3-2012 IN WA.NO.655 OF 2012
EXHIBIT-P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE IA.NO.1 OF 2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR DATED 17-4-2012
EXHIBIT--P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED 28-4-2012 FILED
BY THE RESPONDENT IN IA.NO.1 OF 2012 (EXHIBIT-P-5)
EXHIBIT-P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 18-5-2012 PASSED BY
THE SUPREME COURT OF INDAI IN SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL
(CIVIL) NO.15314 OF 2012
EXHIBIT-P8 - TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED ORDER IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2012 IN ARC
NO.24 OF 2010 PASSED BY THE ARBITRATOR
EXHIBIT-P9 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20-6-2012 PASSED BY THE
HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P.(C). NO. 14313/2012
EXHIBIT-P10 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27-6-2012 PASSED BY THE
TRIBUNAL IN UNNUMBERED APPEAL OF 2012
EXHIBIT-P11 - TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION NO.59 OF 2012 BEFORE
THE TRIBUNAL DATED 22-6-2012.
EXHIBIT-P12 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN REVISION PETITION NO.59 OF 2012
DATED 6-10-2012 OF THE KERLA CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:-
---------------------------------------
EXHIBIT-R1(a) - TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 7.4.2008 IS
BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DCS
OP(C).No. 4238 of 2012 (O)
EXHIBIT-R1(b) - TRUE COPY OF THE 2ND AGREEMENT STYLED AS
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING DATED 7.4.2008
BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT-R1(c) - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE SOCIETY
DATED 1.10.2009 TO THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT-R1(d) - TRUE COPY OF THE REPLYDATED 23.11.2009 SENT BY THE
PETITIONER TO THE SOCIETY
EXHIBIT-R1(e) - TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE GENERAL BODY
DATED 15.04.2008
EXHIBIT-R1(f) - TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN CRIME NO.
1546/2010 FILED AGAINST THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
EXHIBIT-R1(g) - TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO. 3358/08 EXECUTED BY THE
SOCIETY WITH THE VENDOR
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
DCS
V.CHITAMBARESH,J.
-------------------------------
O.P.(C) No. 4238 of 2012
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of March, 2014
JUDGMENT
The authorities have rightly refused leave to issue notice to the third party under Order VIII A of the Code of Civil Procedure applicable to the proceedings. This is because the plea of contribution or indemnity raised by the petitioner is conspicuously absent in Ext. P2 written statement filed to Ext. P1 plaint. Whether an additional written statement could be filed and leave sought again is altogether a different matter which need not be considered now. The position as it now stands does not spin out a case of contribution or indemnity emerging from the plaint and the written statement in the arbitration case.
2. The question whether notice to third party could be taken in the arbitration proceedings is no longer resintegra in view of Jacob Varkey v. Idukki District Co-operative Bank Ltd. [2001 (2) KLT 77]. But the petitioner has no specific case in Ext. P2 written statement that he is entitled to contribution from the assignor or indemnity from the Panchayath. The O.P.(C) No. 4238 of 2012 2 question whether the petitioner was prevented by the obstructionist tactics of the Panchayath in laying the road can ofcourse be decided in this arbitration case. There is however no error of jurisdiction in Ext. P8 order as confirmed by Ext. P12 order of the Tribunal warranting interference in this supervisory jurisdiction.
The Original Petition is dismissed. No costs.
V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE DCS