Panniyankara Service Co-Op.Bank And ORS. v. Jt.Registrar (General),Co-Op.Societies
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2015/11TH CHAITHRA, 1937 RP.No. 326 of 2009 (C) ----------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP No.20817/2002 DATED 19-10-2004 REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONRS 1 AND 4:
--------------------------------------------------------------
1. PANNIYANKARA SERVICE CO-OP.BANK LTD.NO.2964- REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.KALLAI, KOZHIKODE.
2. CALICUT NORTH SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.LL 37, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.KARUVASSERY, KOZHIKODE.
BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 2 AND 3:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. JT.REGISTRAR (GENERAL),CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOZHIKODE.
2. THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. STATE OF KERALA- REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
4. JACOB K.BABU, CHIEF PROMOTER, CALICUT CITY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KOZHIKODE.
5. CALICUT CITY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE (ADDL) BANK LTD. NO.D 2777 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE.
RP.No. 326 of 2009 (C)
6. CALICUT TOWN SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.D 2665- REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, JAWAHAR BUILDING, K.P.K.MENON ROAD, CALICUT-1.
7. VENGERI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.2714, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.VENGERI KOZHIKODE-10.
R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SOJAN JAMES R5 BY SRI.P.P.JACOB THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
MJL
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.
--------------------------- R.P.No.326 of 2009 IN O.P.No.20817 of 2002 ------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of April, 2015
ORDER
This review petition was filed as early as in the year 2009. Despite notice ordered by this court against the 4th respondent, as early as on 06/10/2009, service against the said respondent remains not complete. Notice sent from this court to the 4th respondent was returned with an endorsement as 'no such addressee'. When the matter was posted before this court on 06/03/2015, learned counsel for the petitioners sought for a week's time to cure the defect. But, endorsement of the Registry would indicate that no steps were taken for curing the defect and to complete service on the 4th respondent. Under the above mentioned circumstances the review petition is hereby dismissed for non prosecution. Sd/-C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE MJL