Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GEORGE JOHN E.O versus BINESH G.

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


GEORGE JOHN E.O v. BINESH G. - WP(C) No. 5326 of 2006(H) [2006] RD-KL 366 (31 July 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 5326 of 2006(H)

1. GEORGE JOHN E.O,
... Petitioner

2. RAJESH KUMAR,

3. RAVEENDRA KURUP,

4. SAM DANIEL,

5. ANIL KUMAR.P.K,

6. SOMASEKHARA PILLAI.V.V.M,

7. AMBIKA,

Vs

1. BINESH.G,
... Respondent

2. K.K.SHAJI,

3. LISSY MATHAI,

4. PARANTHAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.

5. ARBITRATOR/CO-OPERATIVE ARBITRATION

6. KERALA CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL,

For Petitioner :SRI.D.SOMASUNDARAM

For Respondent :SRI.T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.THANKAPPAN

Dated :31/07/2006

O R D E R

K.THANKAPPAN, J.

W.P.(C)NO. 5326 OF 2006

Dated this the 31st day of July, 2006



JUDGMENT

The petitioners are the elected Managing Committee members of the 4th respondent - Bank. The first respondent filed an Election Petition before the 5th respondent against the election of the petitioners. Though there was a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition, the 5th respondent as per Ext.P5 order found that the petition was maintainable. The Election Petition is now pending before the 5th respondent. Against Ext.P5 order, the petitioners filed R.P.No.258 of 2005 before the 6th respondent - Kerala Co-operative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram along with I.A.No.348 of 2005. The interlocutory application was dismissed against which this Writ Petition is filed.

2. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the reliefs sought for, it is only proper for this Court to give a direction to the 6th respondent to dispose of Ext.P6 Revision Petition as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P.(C)NO.5326/2006 2 Ordered accordingly. There will be a further direction that till a final decision is taken in the Revision Petition, the result of the Election Petition pending before the 5th respondent shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions.

(K.THANKAPPAN, JUDGE)

sp/ W.P.(C)NO.5326/2006 3

K.THANKAPPAN, J.

W.P.(C)NO.5326/2006

JUDGMENT

31ST JULY, 2006 W.P.(C)NO.5326/2006 4


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.