NAICKERPATTI PRIMARY CO-OP BANK Vs. N NALLIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have to hold that the order passed by the lower Forum deserves to be reversed for the following reasons. The award amount was deposited by the appellants herein on 19.11.1999. Learned Counsel for the appellants would submit that after the deposit, the lower Forum has passed order issuing Non-bailable Warrant on 8.2.2000. Admittedly the appellants herein who are President and Secretary of T. S.3 Naickerpatti Primary Co-operative Bank, Naickerpatti came into the scene only in the year 1997, whereas the complaint was filed in 1996. The then Secretary of the Co-operative Bank misappropriated the amount and certain complaints were lodged and criminal case is pending against the employees namely the then Secretary and an employee by name Padmavathy. It is stated that because the records were seized by he CCIW Police, the opposite parties who came into the picture subsequently, could not get hold of the records so that they can appear before the Forum and place the relevant materials before the Forum. Moreover, it is to be pointed out that in the cause title it is described as President, T. S.3 Naickerpatti Primary Co-operative Bank, Naickerpatti and Secretary of T. S.3 Naickerpatti Primary Co-operative Bank, Naickerpatti. The deposit was not received by them in their individual capacity. It was received by the Society of which they were not the then President and Secretary, but somebody else was the then President and Secretary. Further, it is sated that the complainant's father borrowed a sum of Rs.9,500/- from the Society and his mother has also borrowed a sum of Rs.15,000/- and, therefore, there was a lien upon the deposit made by the complainant with the Society and without going into that aspect, the lower Forum has passed the order. It is also stated that the amounts deposit with the Primary Co-operative Bank have been guaranteed by the Apex Bank, namely the Central Co-operative Bank. But the same Bank has not been made party. Therefore, considering these facts, we are of the opinion that the order passed by the lower Forum directing issuance of NBW against the appellants herein has to be set aside, moreover when the award amount has been deposited by the appellants.

(2.) Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, we hold that the order passed by the lower Forum issuing NBW deserves to be set aside. Accordingly we accept this appeal and set aside the order passed by the lower Forum directing issuance of NBW. In the circumstances, we order no costs in this appeal.