R. Narayana Pisharadi, J

These writ appeals are directed against the judgment rendered by a learned single Judge of this court in W.P. (C) No.18243 of 2015 and W.P.(C)No.39498 of 2015.

Writ Appeal No.1977 of 2017

2. This appeal arises out of the judgment in W.P. (C) No. 18243 of 2015. The brief facts of this case are as follows: Choondacherry Service Co-operative Bank Limited, the writ petitioner, had deposited Rs.90,00,000/- in the Meenachil Rubber Marketing and Processing Co-operative Society. The amount was deposited for a period of 13 months. The fixed deposit made has attained maturity on 14.04.2015. But, the Society refused to refund the amount covered by the fixed deposit receipt to the petitioner bank. The writ petition was filed for issuing a direction to the Society to pay the amount covered by the fixed deposit receipt to the petitioner bank with future interest.

3. The Society filed counter affidavit in the writ petition admitting the liability to pay the amount to the bank. But, the Society contended that no writ petition is maintainable against a cooperative society. The Society also contended that the writ jurisdiction of the court cannot be exercised to grant the relief prayed for by the bank when alternative statutory remedy is available to the bank. The Society pleaded that it could not pay the amount due to the bank within time due to financial crunch.

4. The learned single Judge held that since the Society has admitted the liability to the bank there is no dispute to be decided by invoking the remedy provided under Section 69 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The learned single Judge repelled the contention that no writ petition would lie against a co-operative society. The learned single Judge allowed the writ petition and directed the Society to pay the entire amount due to the bank with interest within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The learned single Judge also directed that the Society will be liable to pay additional interest at the rate of 9%, if it failed to pay the amount within the stipulated time. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned single Judge, the Society has filed W.A.No.1977 of 2017.

Writ Appeal No. 2351 of 2017

5. This appeal arises from the judgment in W.P. (C) No. 39498 of 2015. The brief facts of this case are as follows: Muthalappuram Service Co-operative Bank Limited, the writ petitioner, deposited a total amount of Rs.50,65,046/- in the Kerala State Co-operative Rubber Marketing Federation Limited, otherwise known as Rubber Mark. As on 31.03.2005, the total amount outstanding as deposit, including interest, is Rs.64,77,246.87. Rubber Mark has admitted this fact in Ext.P13 letter given to the bank. On attaining maturity of the deposits made, the bank demanded the aforesaid amount from Rubber Mark. But, the Rubber Mark refused to pay the amount due to the bank. The writ petition was filed to issue direction to the Rubber Mark to pay the amount due to the bank with interest.

6. Rubber Mark filed a counter affidavit in the writ petition contending that the bank has got effective alternative remedy under Section 69 of the Act. Rubber Mark also contended that the plea of the bank that the deposits have attained maturity is not correct.

7. The learned single Judge held that Rubber Mark has admitted deposit of an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- by the bank and it has also admitted that an amount of Rs.64,77,246.87 is due from it to the bank. The learned single Judge directed Rubber Mark to repay the amount covered by the fixed deposit to the bank within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Rubber Mark has filed W.A.No.2351 of 2017 challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and also the respondents/writ petitioners.

9. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that no writ petition is maintainab