W.A. Nos. 489, 491 and 499 of 2020: Mavelikara Taluk Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. 707, Thazhakkara Branch, vs V.N. Sasidharakurup and others

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL** **TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 31ST BHADRA, 1942** **W.A.No.489 OF 2020** **AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.03.2019 IN W.P.(C.)NO. 35028/2018(C) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA** ## **APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 4 & 5:** **1 MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 707 THAZHAKKARA BRANCH, THAZHAKKARA P. O., MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 695 102, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, (MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.707, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HEAD OFFICE, PULIMOODU JUNCTION, MAVELIKKARA P. O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 695 101)** **2 THE PART-TIME ADMINISTRATOR MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.707, THAZHAKKARA BRANCH, THAZHAKKARA P. O., MAVELIKKARA TALUK ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 695 102, (PRESENTLY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.707, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, HEAD OFFICE, PULIMOODU JUNCTION, MAVELIKKARA P. O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 695 101)** **BY ADV. SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR** ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:** - **1 V.N.SASIDHARA KURUP AGED 65 YEARS S/O. NARAYANAN NAIR, VISHNU PRIYA, VETTIYAR P. O., MAVELIKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 690 558.** - **2 SUMANGALA AGED 61 YEARS D/O. VASUDEVAN PILLAI, VISHNU PRIYA, VETTIYAR P. O., MAVELIKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 690 558.** - **3 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) OFFICE OF THE CO-OPERATIVE JOINT REGISTRAR, ALAPPUZHA P. O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688 011.** **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 2** - **4 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) OFFICE OF CO-OPERATIVE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, PULIMOODU JUNCTION, MAVELIKKARA P. O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690 101.** **5 THE BRANCH MANAGER MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.707, THAZHAKKARA BRANCH, THAZHAKKARA P. O., MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 690 101.** ## **BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA** **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-09-2020, ALONG WITH W.A.NO. 491/2020 AND W.A.NO.499/2020, THE COURT ON 22-09-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 3** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR &** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL** **TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 16TH BHADRA, 1942** **W.A.No.491 OF 2020** **AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.03.2019 IN W.P.(C.)NO.39529/2018(M)OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA** ## **APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 4 & 5:** **1 MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 707 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HEAD OFFICE, PULIMOODU JUNCTION, MAVELIKKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-695 101. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR, MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.707, HEAD OFFICE, PULIMOODU JUNCTION, MAVELIKKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-695 101. (PRESENTLY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.707, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, HEAD OFFICE, PULIMOODU JUNCTION, MAVELIKKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-695 101)** **BY ADV. SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR** ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:** |**1**|**CHITHRA RAJ, AGED 26 YEARS**| |---|---| ||**D/O.LEELAMMA, KUNNUMPUZHAYATH LEKSHMI BHAVAN,**| ||**THAZHAKKARA P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA-690 101.**| |**2**|**REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,**| ||**OFFICE OF REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,**| ||**RAJAJI NAGAR, MARKET ROAD, STATUE, THYCAUD.**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.**| |**3**|**JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL),**| ||**MINI CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA P.O.,**| ||**NEAR DIST. COURT, ALAPPUZHA-688 011.**| |**4**|**ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,**| ||**MINI CIVIL STATION, 2ND FLOOR, MAVELIKKARA-690 101.**| ||**BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA**| **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-09-2020, ALONG WITH WA.489/2020, WA.499/2020, THE COURT ON 22-09-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 4** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR &** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL** **TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 16TH BHADRA, 1942** **W.A.No.499 OF 2020** **AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.03.2019 IN W.P.(C.)NO. 4749/2019(P) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA** ## **APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5:** |**1**|**MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 707,**| |---|---| ||**REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HEAD OFFICE, PULIMOODU**| ||**JUNCTION, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA - 690 101.**| |**2**|**THE SECRETARY, MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK**| ||**LTD.NO.707, HEAD OFFICE, PULIMOODU JUNCTION, MAVELIKARA,**| ||**ALAPPUZHA - 690 101.**| |**3**|**THE ADMINISTRATOR IN-CHARGE,**| ||**MAVELIKARA TALUK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.707, HEAD OFFICE,**| ||**PULIMOODU JUNCTION, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA- 690 101.**| ||**(PRESENTLY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MAVELIKARA TALUK**| ||**CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.707, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT,**| ||**HEAD OFFICE, PULIMOODU JUNCTION, MAVELIKKARA P.O.,**| ||**ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 695 101).**| ||**BY ADV. SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR**| ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2:** |**1**|**BRAHMADEVAN PILLAI C.,AGED 53 YEARS, THADATHIL,UMBERNADU,**| |---|---| ||**KALLUMALA P.O., MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT- 690 101.**| |**2**|**VIJAYALAKSHMI O.,AGED 46 YEARS,**| ||**W/O.BRAHMADEVAN PILLAI C., THADATHIL, UMBERNADU,**| ||**KALLUMALA P.O., MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 101.**| |**3**|**THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.**| |**4**|**THE JOINT REGISTRAR,**| ||**OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE**| ||**SOCIETIES(GENERAL), TECHI ANGALAMMAN COMPLEX,**| ||**OPP. ST.ANTONYS SCHOOL, THIRUVAMADY, ALAPPUZHA - 688 002.**| **BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA** **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-09-2020, ALONG WITH WA.489/2020, WA.491/2020, THE COURT ON 22-09-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 5** ## **JUDGMENT** Haripal J. These are appeals preferred under Section 5 of the High Court Act, challenging the correctness of the judgments of the learned Single Judge in W.P(C). Nos. 35028/2018, 39529/2018 and 4749/2019 respectively. Writ petitioners are admittedly depositors in the Thazhakkara Branch of the Mavelikkara Taluk Co-operative Bank Limited No. 707. When the fixed deposits made by them had attained maturity, they approached the Bank for getting back the same, which was not honourned and that made them to approach this Court seeking writ of mandamus and other appropriate writ, order or direction. The appellants contested the writs contending, inter alia, that large scale misappropriation of money was detected in the bank and that has rendered the appellants difficult to repay the amount as and when demanded. Thus the appellants sought further time for repaying the amount. 2. Having not convinced, the learned Single Judge by the ## **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 6** impugned judgments directed the part-time Administrator of the Bank to repay the amounts within stipulated period of time. Later, the appellants filed review petitions against all the three judgments. The learned Single Judge, by separate orders dated 04.12.2019 directed the Bank to honour the claims of the depositors latest by six months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. All these appeals were preferred on 09.03.2020, aggrieved by the judgments and orders of the learned Single Judge. 3. We heard counsel on both sides. As the appellants are common and since matters involved are identical, all the cases were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 4. The learned counsel for the appellants has fairly submitted that the appellants do not have any dispute on the claims for the return of the amount deposited by them. But according to him, large scale defalcation of amounts was detected in the Bank which made the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to interfere and supersede the then Board of Directors, appoint an Administrator for interim management of the affairs and to initiate disciplinary ## **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 7** proceedings against the then Secretary and two staff members, who stand dismissed from service; surcharge proceedings have also been initiated against them. Moreover, the Bank also intend to initiate Arbitration proceedings so as to resolve the disputes. 5. The contentions of the parties reveal that petitioners in W.P.(C.) No. 35028/2018 had made fixed deposits of Rs. 27 lakhs – at first Rs.22 lakhs in their joint name for four years on 10.12.2012 and another amount of Rs. 5 lakhs in the name of the first petitioner for one year on 23.04.2016. When these amounts were matured, they sought repayment with accrued interest, but the Bank could not honour it and that made them to move this Court. The petitioner in W.P.(C.) No. 39529/2018 moved the writ petition when her amount in deposit, Rs. 10 lakhs deposited for three years on 30.05.2015 was not returned after attaining maturity. She has a further grievance that even an amount of Rs. 2 lakhs remaining in Savings Bank Account also could not be withdrawn by her. The petitioners in W.P.(C). No. 4749/2019 are also similarly aggrieved. They have made fixed deposits of Rs. 5 lakhs each on 27.12.2018 for one year, which was **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 8** not returned on demand, after attaining maturity. 6. We are afraid as to how the appellants could venture making any reference for arbitration, having regard to the submissions made above. It is very obvious that a reference is possible or an arbitration could be initiated only if there is a 'dispute', in the ordinary meaning of the term. Here, in these matters, even the appellants have no case that the claims are bogus, based on fabricated documents. Nothing has been stated suspecting the genuineness of the claims made by the party respondents based on documents exhibited in these proceedings. The appellants also were not heard saying that the fixed deposits have not been matured, nor there is a dispute on the rate of interest agreed to be paid to the respondents. In this setting, making any attempt to refer on an artificial or created cause of action would only defeat the ends of justice. In an identical setting, in the decision reported in **Gandhigram Agro Based Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Marangattupilly Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Others [2019 (3) KHC 60 (DB)]** in which one of us (Ravikumar, J.) was party observed that the appellants in an identical ## **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 9** situation, have a duty coupled with liability to repay the amount deposited along with interest at assured rate, that they cannot wriggle out of it by taking up a totally non-available contention that a dispute regarding interest payable etc. nor parties can be relegated to avail the remedy under Section 69 of the Co-operative Societies Act. It is to be noticed that appellants do not have a case that the writ petitions were not maintainable or that the learned Single Judge had exceeded the jurisdiction in granting the reliefs to the respondents. There is also no case that they have alternate efficacious remedy. 7. The appellants have stated various steps initiated by them to replenish the money that was allegedly siphoned off by the then Board of Directors, staff members etc. They only want some time to repay the amount. It may be true that the then Board of Directors of the Society, the Secretary and some staff members together had misappropriated huge sum of money from the society, that made the Registrar to supersede the Board of Directors and to initiate disciplinary proceedings against erring employees. Whatever it may be, it is not the concern of the hapless depositors like the party ## **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 10** respondents, who had made large sum of deposits in the Bank, which is their hard earned money, reposing trust and confidence created by the appellants. We do not know whether the appellants have obtained license from the Reserve Bank of India for doing such transactions under Section 22 of the Banking Regulation Act. But once it is admitted that such amounts are in deposit, on getting matured, they are bound to repay the same with agreed rates of interest. It has come out that the Bank is not in a position even to honour requests for withdrawing money from the Savings Bank Account. Such a state of affairs cannot be approved in right earnest. Now after making the deposits and long after it got matured, the respondents have been made to stand in wait with begging bowls and then move this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Even though the impugned judgments were passed in March, 2019 and review petitions were disposed of on 04.12.2019 stipulating a six months' time limit, still matters are remaining at the beginning stage. Even the six months' period offered by the appellants in ground (c) for arranging money by completing execution proceedings etc. has **W.A.Nos. 489, 491 & 499 of 2020 11** expired, but the state of affairs has not improved. That means this is only a 'time buying' exercise which cannot be approved by this Court. After considering the totality of the circumstances, we do not find any tenable ground to interfere with the decisions of the learned Single Judge. The appeals are liable to be dismissed. Dismissed. We abstain from awarding costs. **SD/-** ## **C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE** **SD/-** **K.HARIPAL, JUDGE** DCS/14.09.2020