2022 (1) TMI 1494

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....apuram in Revision Petition No.102/2019. 2. According to the petitioner, despite having assertion on the part of the petitioner that the petitioner's name is A.P.Thomas alias Tomy Peter, the learned Tribunal remanded the matter for the purpose of deciding as to whether A.P. Thomas alias Tomy Peter are one and same person. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner's name is A.P.Thomas alias Tomy Peter and the petitioner produced Ext.P8 certificate issued by the Village Officer dated 11.03.2013 stating that A.P.Thomas, S/o.Peter T.Anthikatt, Anthikkatt (H), Kadavanthra and Tomy Peter, S/o.Peter T.Anthikatt, Anthikkatt (H), Kadavanthra, Ernakulam are one and the same person. 4. Though the learn....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... view of the ratio in Valsaraj's case (Supra), a petition challenging the said order under under Article 226 is perfectly maintainable. I do agree with the settled law. 6. It is settled in law that misquoting or non-quoting of provision of law is not a ground to dismiss an application or a legal proceeding, if the petition is otherwise maintainable in the eye of law, the same shall be entertained, treating the same, as one filed under the relevant provision. In view of the above settled law, I am inclined to treat this petition as one filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and, accordingly, this challenge at the instance of the Cooperative Society is not found maintainable. 7. As I have already observed, according to the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty of A.P.Thomas alias Tomy Peter is fully established. That apart, there is no reason to discard Ext.P8 in the context of events that no other person claiming himself as Tomy Peter, so far not made any claim in respect of the Fixed Deposits, which were effected much earlier. 10. Be it so, I am of the view that the order in Revision Petition passed by the Cooperative Tribunal is illegal and, therefore O.P.No.1831/2021 is allowed and the said order is set aside. Consequently, it is held that the Award passed by the Arbitrator shall revive for executing the same. 11. O.P.(C) No.160/2020 is an application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging that the Sub Court, Kochi has no jurisdiction to execute the Award of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nate to him empowered by the Registrar in this behalf, by the attachment and sale or sale without attachment of any property of the person or a society against whom the order, decision or award has been obtained or passed." 12. Refuting this contention, the learned counsel for the depositor placed reliance on the decision in Parappanangadi Co-operative Service Bank Ltd. v. Sainaba : 2013 KHC 2717 to contend that an Award shall be deemed to be a decree of Civil Court and shall be executed in a same manner as a decree of such court. 13. In view of the settled law, I am not inclined to discuss this matter elaborately. Therefore, the challenge in O.P.(C) No. 160/2020 is found to be merit less. Therefore, O.P.(C) No. 160/2020 stands as dismis....