The petitioner is aggrieved with the dismissal of the revision before the Tribunal, for reason only of delay caused. The delay is of 417 days. The petitioner contends that the delay has been properly explained. 2. The background facts are that, petitioner's mother was a borrower from the 2nd respondent; to which loan, the 1st respondent was the surety. The surety from whose salary, certain amounts were deducted towards satisfaction of that loan was before the Arbitrator under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 seeking refund of amounts so paid in satisfaction of the loan account. The petitioner's mother who was a defendant therein, died during the pendency of the proceedings. Admittedly, the legal heirs were impleaded and an award was passed at Ext.P1. The legal heirs including the petitioner did not W.P.(C) No.20105 of 2011 - K 2 choose to file a revision within a reasonable time.
3. The petitioner's contention is that the petitioner met with an accident and hence the revision could not be filed. However, there were other legal heirs, who were impleaded before the Arbitrator, who also did not file a proper revision before the Tribunal. The petitioner has also not given any details as to the accident and the period of invalidation due to such an accident. In such circumstance, this Court does not find any satisfactory explanation for the delay caused. This Court in Gopinathan Nair v. Kerala Co-operative Tribunal [2014(4) KLT 647], held that though no time is provided, a revision has to be filed within a reasonable time, ie., 90 days, which has been consistently held to be a reasonable time by various precedents of this Court. The writ petition is hence devoid of merit.
4. However, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that in Ext.P1, in the operative portion of the award, realisation of the amounts due is directed from the legal heirs. The contesting respondent W.P.(C) No.20105 of 2011 - K 3 points out that the attachment made, is only of the deceased mother's property and not that of the legal heirs. In any event, the proceedings against the deceased person, for recovery of amounts in a liability incurred in his/her life time, can only be against the assets left behind by such deceased person. The award can be proceeded with against the legal heirs only to the extent of such assets left behind by the deceased and which devolved upon the legal heirs.
The writ petition is dismissed with the above observation, leaving the parties to suffer their respective costs.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB // true copy // P.A To Judge.