The court emphasized that repeated frivolous legal actions constitute an abuse of process, meriting dismissal.

JUDGMENT

This Writ Petition is preferred by the petitioner seeking a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P2 notice, which called upon the petitioner to attend a hearing in connection with an application for transfer of registry preferred by the 3^rd respondent. The petitioner also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 to consider and pass orders in Ext.P1 request of the petitioner, wherein the petitioner sought for rejecting the transfer of registry sought for by the 3^rd respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent and the learned Government Pleader.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Awards passed in these cases are a nullity, inasmuch as Aliyamma Thomas, one among the persons against whom Awards have been passed was dead as on the date of passing the award. Necessary applications under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure have already been filed before the Munsiff Court, wherein the execution petitions preferred by the 3^rd respondent are being considered, where again the same contention has been urged. According to the petitioner, the revenue officials acting on political influence to effect transfer of registry in the name of the 3^rd respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent Bank would submit that the instant Writ Petition is the fifth one filed by the petitioner/ his brother/ family members. A loan was availed by one V.T Thomas, his wife Aliyamma Thomas and three others. Proceedings were initiated by the Bank by filing arbitration cases, when the borrowers committed default. Awards were passed in the arbitration cases. In furtherance of the execution of the Award, the borrowers first approached this Court by filing W.P(C) No.21149/2018. The same was disposed of by the judgment, produced at R3(a). The Writ Petition was dismissed. According to the learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent, the contention that Aliyamma Thomas was no more, at the time of passing the Award, was not urged in that Writ Petition. Thereafter, at the stage of confirmation of the sale, the borrowers again approached this Court by filing W.P(C)No.7794/2021. The same was also dismissed vide Ext.R3(b) judgment. In that Writ Petition, the petitioner therein has taken this contention that the Award passed is a nullity, inasmuch as Aliyamma Thomas was no more at the time of passing the award. A perusal of Ext.R3(b) judgment, at paragraph no.2, would indicate the same. Holding that the petitioner has no bonafides, the said Writ Petition was dismissed. It is noteworthy that the petitioner in that Writ Petition is the self-same petitioner herein by name, Rajeev Thomas. Thereafter, the borrowers again approached this Court in the year 2022, seeking to avail a one time settlement Scheme by filing W.P(C)No.31/2022. That Writ Petition was closed, recording the direction of the Joint Registrar that the petitioner can be afforded with the benefits of the O.T.S scheme. Accordingly O.T.S scheme was afforded to the petitioner. However, the payments were not effected. Alleging that the time granted was not sufficient, the petitioner again approached this Court by filing WP(c)No.17739/2022. The same was later withdrawn by the petitioner therein. It is after that the instant Writ Petition is filed seeking to prevent the transfer of registry. Learned Counsel would also point out that the petitioner have approached the Government seeking to set aside the same. The same has been dismissed, vide Ext.R3(c) Order.

5. Learned Government Pleader would submit that the application for transfer of registry is not being considered only because of the interim order passed by this Court in the instant Writ Petition. It was also submitted that both par