USHAKUMARI P.V vs THE BALAGRAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE LTD.

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 24843

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Gopinath P., J
USHAKUMARI P.V – Appellant
Versus
THE BALAGRAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE LTD. – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 11181 OF 2026

Important Points

The courts maintain that appeals under cooperative society statutes must be afforded a fair hearing before any recovery actions are taken.

Subject

Civil - Cooperative Societies

Act Referred

Kerala Co-operative Societies Act: S.68, S.83

Headnote

The judgment pertains to a writ petition under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, where the petitioner challenges an order. The court determines to stay recovery proceedings pending the appeal process, indicating no opinion on merits. The petitioner must pay the appeal fee. The outcome is the dismissal of the writ petition.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.V.H.JASMINE, SRI.JOHIN JOHNSON, SRI.JIBI JOHNSON
For the Respondents: SMT. RESMI THOMAS (GP)

Table of Content
1. challenges regarding order under cooperative societies (Para 1 , 2)
2. recovery proceedings are suspended until appeal consideration (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has suffered Ext.P6 order in proceedings under Section 68 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act , 1969 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2. When this matter is taken up for consideration today, it is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner received Ext.P6 order dated 31-01-2026 only on 28-02-2026, and Ext.P7 appeal has been filed under Section 83 (1)(e) of the Act before the Government along with an application for stay.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing that till the stay petition filed by the petitioner along with Ext.P7 appeal is taken up and considered by the additional 5^th respondent, further recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P6 order shall be kept in abeyance. I make it clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. It is also clarified that orders on the stay petition shall be passed after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Further, it is made clear that the petitioner shall pay the necessary fee for maintaining the appeal before the Government.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.