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 0]

Kerala High Court

Kala S vs Chirayinkil Service Co-Operative Ltd on 24 October, 2011

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT:

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

    THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2017/4TH JYAISHTA, 1939

                 WP(C).No. 20942 of 2012 (P)
                 ----------------------------


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

           KALA S.,
           D/O.SUJATHA,
           KRISHNA VILASOM,
           CHIRAYINKIL P.O.,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.


           BY ADV. SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ


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

          1.CHIRAYINKIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE LTD,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
           CHIRAYINKIL P.O.,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

          2.SPECIAL SALE OFFICER/ARBITRATOR,
           SENIOR CO-OPERATIVE INSPECTOR,
           OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL),
           CHIRAYINKIL, ATTINGAL P.O.,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.


           R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN
           R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. MABLE C. KURIAN


       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)  HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
       ON 25-05-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
       FOLLOWING:


EL

WP(C).No. 20942 of 2012 (P)
----------------------------

                           APPENDIX

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

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE AWARDS PASSED IN A.R.C.233/2007,
           234/2007 AND 235/2007.

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICES ISSUED BY 2ND
            RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS SHOWING THE REMITTANCE
            OF RS.25,000/-, RS.50,000/- AND RS.50,000/-

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPIES OF THE STAY ORDERS IN IA 156/2012 IN
            APPEAL 60/12, IA 1586/2012 IN APPEAL 61/12 & IA
            159/2012 IN APPEAL 62/12 PASSED BY KERALA CO-
            OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS DATED 24-10-2011 SHOWING
            THE REMITTANCE OF RS.50,000/-EACH.

EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICES OF ATTACHMENT AT THE
            PREMISES OF THE PETITIONER.

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

EXHIBIT R1(A): TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZZAR DATED 25.06.2012

EXHIBIT R2(A): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.10.2011

EXHIBIT R2(B): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.01.2012

EXHIBIT R2(C): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.06.2012
              SEEKING POLICE PROTECTION

                                           TRUE COPY




                                          P.S. TO JUDGE

EL



                       SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
          --------------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C) No.20942 of 2012
          -----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 25th day of May, 2017


                            JUDGMENT

Petitioner has defaulted repayment of a loan, consequent to which, 1st respondent has secured awards in A.R.C Nos.233/2007 to 235/2007. Consequent to the non-payment and while the appeal was pending before the Tribunal against the A.R.C proceedings, movable articles of the petitioner were attached. It is constrained under such circumstances, petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition.

2. Apparently, an interim order was passed by this Court on 11.09.2012, directing the respondents to release the movable articles attached in pursuance of the A.R.C proceedings. Aggrieved by the said interim order, 1st respondent has preferred W.A.No.1702 of 2012. In the said writ appeal, an interim order was passed on 25.09.2012, directing the 1st respondent to release the movable articles on payment of an amount of Rs.55,000/-. Thereafter, the writ appeal was disposed of making the interim order absolute on 16.10.2012.

W.P.(C) No.20942 of 2012 2

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, to his knowledge, the amount is paid and the movable articles are released to the petitioner. However, after hearing the respective counsel, if at all anything survives in respect of the attachment of the movable articles, the petitioner will be at liberty to approach the respective authority and seek necessary reliefs.

With the above observation, the writ petition is closed.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE St/-

25.05.2017