The petitioner was a former employee of the fourth respondent co-operative society.

He
was dismissed from service on allegations of misconduct. Later, the fourth respondent
society filed ARC No.3 of 2009 before the Arbitrator. In the arbitration case, the
petitioner was set exparte on 16.6.2010 and thereafter an exparte award was passed on
4.9.2010 whereby the fourth respondent society was permitted to recover from him the
sum of Rs.3,19,904.54. It is stated that a copy of the exparte award was served on the
petitioner on 8.6.2011 along with Ext.P1 letter dated 1.6.2011 as required under rule 68
of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rule, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules' for
short). The petitioner thereupon filed Ext.P2 application dated 14.6.2011 before the third
respondent Arbitrator requesting him to set aside the ex-parte award passed against him.
This writ petition is filed for an order directing the third respondent to pass expeditious
orders thereon within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

2. This Court has in Thankam R.Pillai v. Arbitrator (1996 (1) KLT 225) and in Paul v.
Assistant Registrar (1998 (2) KLT 449)
 held that Arbitrators appointed under section 69 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies
Act are empowered to set aside exparte awards. Ext.P1 award discloses that the
petitioner was set exparte on 16.6.2010 and thereafter an exparte award was passed on
4.9.2010. In such circumstances, as the Arbitrator is empowered to entertain Ext.P2 and
to pass orders thereon, I am of the opinion that the Arbitrator should consider Ext.P2
application and take an appropriate decision thereon expeditiously.

I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the third respondent to
enquire into Ext.P2 application and pass appropriate orders thereon after affording the
petitioner and the decree holder bank an opportunity of being heard and pass final orders
thereon expeditiously and in any event within an outer limit of three months from the
date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before him.

The petitioner was a former employee of the fourth respondent co-operative society. He
was dismissed from service on allegations of misconduct. Later, the fourth respondent
society filed ARC No.3 of 2009 before the Arbitrator. In the arbitration case, the
petitioner was set exparte on 16.6.2010 and thereafter an exparte award was passed on
4.9.2010 whereby the fourth respondent society was permitted to recover from him the
sum of Rs.3,19,904.54. It is stated that a copy of the exparte award was served on the
petitioner on 8.6.2011 along with Ext.P1 letter dated 1.6.2011 as required under rule 68
of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rule, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules' for
short). The petitioner thereupon filed Ext.P2 application dated 14.6.2011 before the third
respondent Arbitrator requesting him to set aside the ex-parte award passed against him.
This writ petition is filed for an order directing the third respondent to pass expeditious
orders thereon within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

2. This Court has in Thankam R.Pillai v. Arbitrator (1996 (1) KLT 225) and in Paul v.
Assistant Registrar (1998 (2) KLT 449)
 held that Arbitrators appointed under section 69 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies
Act are empowered to set aside exparte awards. Ext.P1 award discloses that the
petitioner was set exparte on 16.6.2010 and thereafter an exparte award was passed on
4.9.2010. In such circumstances, as the Arbitrator is empowered to entertain Ext.P2 and
to pass orders thereon, I am of the opinion that the Arbitrator should consider Ext.P2
application and take an appropriate decision thereon expeditiously.

I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the third respondent to
enquire into Ext.P2 application and pass appropriate orders thereon after affording the
petitioner and the decree holder bank an opportunity of being heard and pass final orders
thereon expeditiously and in any event within an outer limit of three months from the
date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before him.