M/S.Paravoor Engineers vs Mr.Azad
2021 Latest Caselaw 11421 Ker

W.P(C).No.2152/2021-T              1

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

    THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                        WP(C).No.2152 OF 2021(T)


PETITIONER:

               M/S.PARAVOOR ENGINEERS
               REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR.SARUN K.S., NEAR
               KALLARAKAL TEMPLE, PERUVARAM, KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE,
               NORTH PARAVOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
               PIN-683513.

               BY ADVS.
               SHRI.INNOCENT FRANCIS PAPALI
               SMT. TINCY M.B.
               SMT.V.P.BIJI

RESPONDENT:

               MR.AZAD
               AGED 49 YEARS,
               S/O.SIDDIQUE, THEYYIDAYIL HOUSE, PADINJAREKKARA
               P.O., VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686615.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P(C).No.2152/2021-T                         2




                                       P.V.ASHA, J.
                    -----------------------------------------------------
                               W.P(c) No.2152 of 2021-T
                     ----------------------------------------------------
                         Dated this the 8th day of April, 2021

                                   JUDGMENT

The Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to the Consumer Dispute Redressal

Forum, Ernakulam to serve a copy of the petition filed and numbered as S.T No.4/2019

was not served on the petitioner. The petitioner has approached this Court after filing

preliminary counter affidavit Ext.P4 before the CDRF. When the Writ Petition came up

for admission, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that copy of

S.T.No.4/2019 was not served on the petitioner. However, in the preliminary counter

affidavit, no such contention was raised. Even though the Writ Petition came up for

consideration on subsequent occasions, the petitioner has not taken any steps to move the

Writ Petition. As the Writ Petition is filed against the execution proceedings initiated by

the respondent after obtaining an order from the appellate authority and the petitioner is

raising the question of maintainability at this stage, I am of the view that the Writ Petition

is only liable to be dismissed.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/- (P.V.ASHA, JUDGE) rtr/

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.04.2015 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM IN C.C.NO.114/2013.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.08.2016 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN APPEAL NO.386/2015.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SATISFACTION NOTE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PRELIMINARY COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONOURABLE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER INFORMING THE PURCHASE OF THE MACHINERY ISSUED BY MR.THAHIR P.P, THAIS FOOD PRODUCTS, IRATTUPETTA.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2019 ALLOWING THE RESPONDENT TO WITHDRAW EA NO.02/2018 BY THE HONOURABLE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.