Secretary, Cochin Shipyard Staff Co-operative House Construction Society Ltd. v. Kerala Co-operative Tribunal, The Arbitrator, Murukesan Nair, Sreedevi Amma (WA Nos.452 & 473 of 2022)
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- Alexander Thomas, J.
- Shoba Annama Eapen, J.
- Judgment Date
- 2022-06-01
- Court Decision / Holding
- Writ Appeals WA Nos.452 & 473 of 2022 are dismissed as not maintainable. The court clarifies that ad-interim orders passed at admission stage cannot be the subject matter of intra-court appeals under Sec.5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, and it is open to the appellant to seek extension or modification of the interim order before the learned Single Judge. The decision explicitly states that no adjudication on merits was undertaken in these appeals.
- Final Disposition
- Dismissed
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Secretary, Cochin Shipyard Staff Co-Operative House Construction Society Ltd.
Respondents
- Kerala Co-Operative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram represented by its Secretary
- The Arbitrator, the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies (General)
- Murukesan Nair
- Sree Devi Amma
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • C.S. Ajith Prakash
- • T.K. Devarajan
- • Paul C Thomas
- • Franklin Arackal
- • M.B. Soori
- • Babu M.
- • Nidhin Raj Vettikkadan
- • Haaris Moosa
- • Ancy Thankachan
- • D.A. Anil Kumar
Counsels for Respondents
- • Sri. T.K. Vipindas (Senior Government Pleader)
Case Synopsis & Summary
The waivers arise out of a common interim order dated 21.03.2022 in WP(C) Nos. 9446/2022 and 9424/2022, challenging the interim stay orders and proceedings in execution proceedings (E.P. No.262/2020) before the Subordinate Judge’s Court, Ernakulam. The appellant is the Secretary of the Cochin Shipyard Staff Co-operative House Construction Society Ltd.; respondents include the Kerala Co-operative Tribunal and the Arbitrator, along with two individuals. The High Court of Kerala, per a Division Bench, notes that the impugned order is an ad-interim, ex parte order issued at the admission stage and not a final or intermediate order. It relies on the long line of jurisprudence beginning with K.S. Das v. State of Kerala (LB, 1992) and followed by Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. v. Saju AR & Ors., P.T. Thomas v. Bijo Thomas, and Thiruvalla East Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. K.J. Amminikutty to hold that such ad-interim or interim orders cannot be subjected to intra-court appeals under Sec.5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act. The court specifies that the appellant can seek extension or modification of the interim order from the Single Judge, but declines to entertain the writ appeals on maintainability grounds, while dismissing them. The judgment ends with the panel’s indication that merits were not examined.
Provisions of Law Cited
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Interim/ad-interim orders may not be subject to intra-court appeals unless they are intermediate orders themselves.
- Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra – doctrine on interpretation of interlocutory orders
- Interlocutory order vs. intermediate order – classification principles cited by the Kerala High Court
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The appellant contends that the interim order dated 21.03.2022 in WP(C) Nos. 9424/2022 and 9446/2022 was issued at the admission stage as an ad-interim ex parte order. They seek extension and/or modification of the interim order and argue for intra-court relief, challenging maintainability under Sec.5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, asserting that the interim order is subject to appellate reconsideration when insufficient grounds exist. They urge that an extension be granted and the matter be heard on merits, arguing that the orders impact execution proceedings and property rights of the society.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents argue that the impugned order is an ad-interim order at the admission stage and cannot be categorized as an intermediate order, therefore not appealable under Sec.5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act. They highlight the jurisprudence including K.S.Das v. State of Kerala (LB), Bharat Petroleum, P.T.Thomas v. Bijo Thomas, and Thiruvalla East Co-operative Bank v. K.J. Amminikutty to oppose maintainability of the appeals and to emphasize that the court should not entertain intra-court appeals against ad-interim orders. They urge dismissal on grounds of maintainability, clarifying that the Single Judge may extend or modify the interim order if necessary.
Cited Precedents (5)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| K.S. Das v. State of Kerala | 1992 (2) KLT 354 (LB) | Positive | Cited as a Large Bench authority establishing that ad-interim/interim orders which cannot be classified as intermediate orders cannot be the subject of intra-court appeals under Sec.5(i). |
| Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. v. Saju AR & Ors. | 2021 (5) KHC 398 (DB) | Positive | Reiterates the position that interim/ad-interim orders not classifiable as intermediate orders are not appealable under Sec.5(i). |
| P.T. Thomas v. Bijo Thomas | 2021 (6) KLT 196 (DB) | Positive | Cited for further affirmation that ad-interim interim orders are not subject to intra-court appeal, discussed by Division Bench in the context of Madhu Limaye doctrine. |
| Thiruvalla East Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. K.J.Amminikutty & anr. | W.A No.1510/2021 (Judgment dated 17.11.2021) | Positive | Cited for jurisprudential discussion on the meaning and classification of interlocutory orders in Division Bench decisions. |
| Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra | (1977) 4 SCC 551 | Positive | Cited as the seminal authority on the interpretation and scope of interlocutory/intermediate orders and their classifications. |
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Secretary, Cochin Shipyard Staff Co-operative House Construction Society Ltd. v. Kerala Co-operative Tribunal, The Arbitrator, Murukesan Nair, Sreedevi Amma (WA Nos.452 & 473 of 2022) and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.