Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

TITTY BABU versus SECRETARY TO GOVT

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


TITTY BABU v. SECRETARY TO GOVT - OP No. 12716 of 1999(L) [2007] RD-KL 5913 (21 March 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 12716 of 1999(L)

1. TITTY BABU
... Petitioner

Vs

1. SECRETARY TO GOVT.
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

Dated :21/03/2007

O R D E R

KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

O.P.No.12716 of 1999 Dated 21st March, 2007.

J U D G M E N T

Challenge is on Ext.P1 award passed by the Arbitrator and Ext.P5 order of the Kerala Cooperative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram, under the provisions of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969. Ext.P1 was an ex parte award. The stand of the respondent before the Arbitrator was that he had no personal liability and the entire transaction was of the firm. Since no opportunity was available to contest the matter on merits, the matter was pursued before the Tribunal leading to Ext.P5 judgment. Unfortunately there is no reference to the contentions as to whether the late husband of the petitioner had personal liability and whether the transaction was only that of the firm and the consequential liability is limited to the firm. Unless that crucial issue is addressed and answered, it cannot be said that there is an order on merits. Therefore, I set aside Ext.P5 with a direction to the Tribunal to consider the matter afresh with notice to the parties. It is made clear that while passing orders as above, the Tribunal shall address the question on merits as to whether there is any personal liability on the late husband of the OP NO.12716/99 2 petitioner in the transaction and whether the liability is only of the firm. Needless to say that in case there is no personal liability, there shall not be any steps against the petitioner or the assets of her late husband. The fate of the amounts deposited by the petitioner would depend on the orders to be passed by the Tribunal. In case the petitioner has no liability, the amounts if any deposited by the petitioner would be refunded with 8% interest. There shall be no recovery till orders are passed by the Tribunal. The writ petition is disposed of as above.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

tgs

KURIAN JOSEPH, J

O.P.No.12716 of 1999 (L)

J U D G M E N T

Dated 21st March, 2007.


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.