Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

K.V.Varghese Aged 77 Years vs Nedungapra Service Co-Op.Bank Ltd

Author: K.Vinod Chandran

Bench: K.Vinod Chandran

       

  

  

 
 
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT:

             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

   WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/27TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935

                    WP(C).No. 30338 of 2013 (N)
                    ----------------------------

PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------

            1.  K.V.VARGHESE AGED 77 YEARS
                  S/O. LATE VARKEY, KAKKORRAN HOUSE, NEDUNGAPRA.P.O.
                  VIA KURUPPAMPADY
                  ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. PIN-683545. (MEMBER NO. 223)

            2.  P.R. NARAYANAN NAIR,  AGED 61 YEARS
                  S/O. RAMAN NAIR, PADIKKAYAPIRATHU HOUSE,
                ARUVAPPARA
                  VIA KURUPPAMPADY
                  ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. PIN-683545. (MEMBER NO. 1584)

            3.  K.M. ELDHO AGED 52 YEARS
                  S/O. LATE K.K. MATHEW, KALLARAPPADY, VENGOOR.P.O.
                  VIA KURUPPAMAPDY
                  ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683546.(MEMBER NO. 1836.)

       BY ADVS.SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN
                        SRI.S.ANANTHAKRISHNAN

RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------

          1. NEDUNGAPRA SERVICE CO-OP.BANK LTD.
             NO. E.135, P.O. NEDUNGAPRA, VIA KURUPPAMPADY
             ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683545.

          2. THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION COMMISSION,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695001.

          3. ELECTGROAL OFFICER OF NEDUNGAPRA SERVICE
             CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,
             P.O.NEDUNGAPRA, VIA KURUPPAMPADY
             ERNAKULAM-683545. (THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF
             CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL) KUNNATHUNADU
             PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683542.

          4. RETURNING OFFICER OF NEDUNGAPRA SERVICE
             CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
             P.O. NEDUNGAPRA, VIA KURUPPAMPADY, ERNAKULAM-683545
             (THE INSPECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL0
             OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, KUNNATHUNADU
             PERUMBAVOOR UNIT, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683542.

       R2 -R 4  BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. D SOMASUNDARAM
       R1  BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN
       R1  BY ADV. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR

       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)  HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION  ON
18-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 30338 of 2013 (N)
----------------------------

APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------

P1. TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTION NOTIFICATION DT. 8-11-13 ISSWUED BY R2
PUBLISHED IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 20-11-13.

P2. TRUE COPY OF VOTERS LIST DT. 30-11`-13.

P3. TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT CLAUSES OF THE BYLAWS OF R1.

P4. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE BYLAWS OF KRARIYELI SERVICE
CO-OPERATIVE BANK.

P5. TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGE OF THE BYLAWS OF ASAMANOOR SERVICE CO-
OPERATIVE BANK.

P6. TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION DT. 28-11-13 BY PETITIONERS.

P6A. TRUE COPY OF ABSTRACT OF EXT. P6.

P7. TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DT. 30-11-13 ISSUED BY R3.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
---------------------------------------


                                        TRUE COPY\\




                                         P. A TO JUDGE



                     K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J
           - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                   W.P(C) No. 30338 of 2013
          - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

        Dated this the 18th day of December, 2013


                           J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are members of the respondent Society to which elections are scheduled on 22.12.2013. As per Ext.P1 notification the last date for submission of objection was 28.11.2013 on which date at 4 p.m., the Electoral Officer received the objection filed by the petitioners, as is evidenced by the endorsement in Ext.P6. By Ext.P6 objection, the petitioners claimed that about 1103 members of the Society were not entitled to hold membership since they are from the area of operation outside that of the Society and hence they would not be entitled to exercise their franchise also. Admittedly, the Electoral Officer had called for the details of the membership from the Society and had found that the persons whose membership are objected to in Ext.P6 were residing within the area of operation of the Society.

2. The learned counsel for the Society submits that in fact, the specific contention of the petitioners as is evidenced from Page 3 of the writ petition is that 8 wards are not within WPC.30338/2013 : 2 : the area of operation of the Society. It is submitted that the amendment to the by-laws of the first respondent Society was made bringing the eight wards within its area of operation and the same was approved by the Joint Registrar by order No.o/9331/12/R Dis dated 22.3.2013. In any event, the petitioners waited till the eve of the election, to raiise an objection, that too regarding the membership of the persons referred to in the complaint, numbering about 1103. This Court in Vijayakumar v. Joint Registrar (1996(1) KLT

285) considered the power of the Returning Officer in considering objections before publication of final voters list, under Rule 35, and held that an objection with respect to the right to vote in an election does not call for a roving enquiry and what is expected of the officer considering the objection is to make a summary enquiry after verifying the same with the materials placed by the objectors and authorities of the Society (Vijayakumar v. Joint Registrar (1996(1) KLT

285). In such circumstance leaving liberty to the petitioners to challenge the elections in a validly instituted Election Petition, the writ petition is dismissed. The claim made by the WPC.30338/2013 : 3 : petitioners in the reply affidavit that the report filed by the Society is a cooked up report can also be raised in the Election Petition.

Writ petition dismissed. Parties are left to suffer their costs.

Sd/-

                             (K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE)

jma              //true copy/


                                      P.A to Judge