SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5629

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
GOPINATH P., J
RAJESH K – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 3319 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.C.D.DILEEP, SMT.SHYLAJA VARGHESE, SHRI.DHEERAJ PRADEEP C., SHRI.DHANJAY DILEEP C., SMT.M.L.REMYA
For the Respondents: SMT. RESMI THOMAS (GP)

The jurisdiction for disputes between members and a co-operative society is governed by Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.

Headnote:The judgment interprets the application of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 regarding member rights and dispute adjudication. The petitioner claims unlawful transfer of deposits by the society, which the court found to necessitate proceedings under Section 69 of the said Act for dispute resolution. The court ordered that the authority consider the grievance and adjudicate accordingly. The petition was disposed of, allowing for further action under the statutory framework.

Table of Content
1. summarizes the petitioner's claims regarding deposit management. (Para 1)
2. discusses the necessity of adhering to section 69 for dispute resolution. (Para 2)
3. court stresses the importance of statutory procedures for member grievances. (Para 3)

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a share holder and member of Palakkad District Astrologers Welfare Co-operative Society Ltd. No.P-1400. According to the petitioner the petitioner subscribed to a daily deposit scheme being conducted by the society. The petitioner contends that when the amount under the daily deposit scheme was due for payment, the amount was transferred to the monthly kuri scheme which was also being conducted by the society with the approval of the competent authorities. It is submitted that when the amount under the kuri was due for payment, the amount payable to the petitioner was transferred to a fixed deposit. It is stated that though certain amounts are due for payment, the same were not paid and certain deposits are treated as long term deposits without the consent of the petitioner. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P11 representation before the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies complaining of the aforesaid acts of the society. The petitioner is before this court seeking the following reliefs;

“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent Society to pay and disburse to the petitioner a sum of Rs.7,75,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Seventy-Five Thousand only) being the deposited amount lawfully due to the petitioner, along with interest at the rate of 13% per annum as assured in the Fixed Deposit Receipts, within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court, (ü) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to direct the 4th respondent Society to pay and disburse to the petitioner a sum of Rs7,75,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Seventy-Five Thousand only) being the deposited amount lawfully due to the petitioner, along with interest at the rate of 13% per annum as assured in the Fixed Deposit Receipts, within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court;

(iii) Declare that the unilateral transfer of the petitioner's matured Daily Deposit and Kuri amounts into Fixed Deposits without actual disbursement is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act , 1969 and the Rules framed thereunder, (iv) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies and other competent statutory authorities to conduct enquiry under Sections 65 or Section 66 of the , 1969 within a time- bound period and to take appropriate recovery and remedial action of surcharge against the officers and members of the Board of Directors responsible for mismanagement or misappropriation, and to ensure disbursement of amounts due to the petitioner;”

2. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents would submit that since the petitioner is a member of the 5th respondent society, any dispute between the petitioner and the society has to be adjudicated in terms of the provisions contained in Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act , 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1969 Act'). It is submitted that if the petitioner were to initiate proceedings under of the 1969 Act, the competent authority can adjudicate the same after hearing to the 5th respondent also.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel Government Pleader, I am of the opinion that there is considerable merit in the contention taken by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents. In the light of the disputes raised by the petitioner, the matter has to be adjudicated by recourse to Section 69 of the 1969 Act. Accordingly, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing that if the petitioner were to initiate proceedings u

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top