Tessy Joseph v. Alakkode Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd and Others (W.P.(C) Nos. 37634 of 2017, 34674 of 2015 and 1421 of 2020)
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- Devan Ramachandran
- Judgment Date
- 2023-01-12
- Court Decision / Holding
- Writ petitions allowed; impugned orders set aside; Arbitration Court to reconsider the entire matter, after giving both sides opportunity to be heard and allowing additional/fresh evidence if entitled in law; Court clarifies that the Arbitration Court will consider Joshy Varghese ( supra) and other precedents as per law, without deciding merits at this stage; ARBITRATION COURT to proceed and conclude not later than six months from receipt of a copy of this judgment.
- Final Disposition
- Writ petitions allowed; impugned orders set aside; matter remitted to Arbitration Court for reconsideration with opportunity to lead fresh evidence; six-month deadline; Joshy Varghese and related precedents to be applied as per law.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Tessy Joseph
- Alakkode Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.
Respondents
- Alakkode Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., No.1588, Alakkode, Kalayanthani P.O., Thodupuzha, Idukki - 685584 (represented by its Secretary)
- The Co-Operative Arbitration Court, Thiruvananthapuram - 695001
- The Kerala Co-Operative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram - 695001
- Board of Directors of the Alakkode Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., No.1588, Alakkode, Kalayanthani P.O., Thodupuzha, Idukki - 685584 (represented by its President)
- The Disciplinary Sub Committee, Alakkode Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Kalayanthani P.O., Thodupuzha, Idukki - 685584 (represented by its Convenor)
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • P. P. Jacob
- • R. Gopalakrishnan
- • Liji J. Vadakedom
- • Rexy Elizabeth Thomas
- • Rajeev Jyothish George
Counsels for Respondents
- • Liji J. Vadakedom
- • Joshy Thannickamattam (GP)
Case Synopsis & Summary
These connected writ petitions challenge orders of the Co-operative Arbitration Court and related regulatory bodies in disputes involving Tessy Joseph and the Alakkode Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. The Kerala High Court notes that declarations in Kodanchery Service Co-operative Bank v. Joshy Varghese (2020 (4) KLT 129) would impact the factual and legal matrix and were not considered by the Arbitration Court. It holds that the entire matter requires reconsideration by the Arbitration Court, adverting to Joshy Varghese (supra). The court also relies on Nanmanda Rural Co-operative Housing Society, Kozhikode and Another v. Ravi K.M. and Another (2015 KHC 868) to permit liberty, including to lead additional/fresh evidence, if entitled in law, before the Arbitration Court. While not venturing into the merits, the court instructs that the Arbitration Court will re-examine the case, consider Joshy Varghese and other precedents in accordance with law, and ensure due process for both sides. The judgment clarifies that the workmen’s contentions based on Joshy Varghese will be treated per law. The writ petitions are allowed; impugned orders are set aside; the Arbitration Court is directed to reconsider the entire matter expeditiously, with a six-month deadline from receipt of the judgment copy, and to issue an appropriate order thereafter.
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The applicants argued for setting aside the impugned orders and directing the Arbitration Court to reconsider the matter, with liberty to lead additional/fresh evidence, invoking Joshy Varghese (supra) and relying on Nanmanda Rural Co-operative Housing Society to permit fresh evidence upon lawful entitlement.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents’ arguments are not expressly stated in the excerpt; the Court notes (i) the parties conceded certain points and (ii) the matter would be governed by the statutory framework, with appropriate considerations of law.
Cited Precedents (2)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kodanchery Service Co-operative Bank v. Joshy Varghese | 2020 (4) KLT 129 | Positive | Declarations in this case would impact the factual/legal scenario and are to be considered by the Arbitration Court in light of Joshy Varghese (supra). |
| Nanmanda Rural Co-operative Housing Society, Kozhikode and Another v. Ravi K.M. and Another | 2015 KHC 868 | Positive | Court relies on this decision to permit liberty to lead additional/fresh evidence before the Arbitration Court. |
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 Tessy Joseph v. Alakkode Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd and Others (W.P.(C) Nos. 37634 of 2017, 34674 of 2015 and 1421 of 2020) and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.