Kerala High Court
Hosdurg Consumer Co-Op. Society ... vs The Consumer Disputes Redressal ... on 16 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 25TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 14239 OF 2010
PETITIONERS:
1 HOSDURG CONSUMER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.
NO.L.451, HOSDURG, P.O. KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, K.V.NARAYANAN.
2 K.V.NARYANAN SECRETARY HOSDURG
CONSUMER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.L.451, HOSDURG,
P.O.KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD.
BY ADVS.
M.RAMESH CHANDER (SR.)
K.A.SANJEETHA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
KASARAGOD.
2 C.V.NARAYANAN, SON OF KANNAN
VAINIGHAL, P.O.BENGALAM, PUDUKKAI, HOSDURG.
3 P.RAMADEVI,
MEMBER THE CONSUMER DISPUTER REDRESSAL FORUM,
KASARAGOD, ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN IA
6418/2010 DATED 26.05.2010.
BY ADVS.
SRI.N.J.JOHNSON
SRI.T.C.SANTHILAL
SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.14239/2010
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.14239 of 2010
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of September 2021
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with
following prayers:
"i. to call for the records leading
to Exts-P3 and P4 and quash the same by
issuance of a writ of certiorari or any
other writ, direction or order.
ii. to grant such other reliefs as
this Honourable Court may deem fit in the
circumstances of the case."
2. The 1st petitioner is a co-operative
society. A suit was instituted before the Sub
court Kasargod by the 2nd respondent herein
against three defendants for realisation of
certain amount. In the suit, the society was
impleaded as a garnishee. The said suit was
decreed and the 2nd respondent filed an
execution petition. In the execution petition
WP(C) NO.14239/2010
an application was filed directing the society
to deposit the amount lying in the account of
the judgment debtors. Therefore the society
deposited the amount of Rs.3,96,524/-.
According to the petitioner, there was no
further amount in the account to satisfy the
decree and the execution petition was closed.
Thereafter, the 2nd respondent filed Ext.P1
complaint before the 1st respondent. Ext.P2
application was filed by the 2nd respondent to
produce the ledger extracts of the society.
As per Ext.P3 the 1st respondent directed the
petitioners to produce the ledger accounts.
Thereafter the petitioners filed an application
to recall Ext.P3 order. Now as per Ext.P4
order, a warrant was issued against the 2nd
petitioner. Aggrieved by Exts.P3 and P4, this
writ petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners.
WP(C) NO.14239/2010
4. I perused Exts.P3 and P4 orders. As
per Ext.P4 order, a non bailable warrant is
issued to the 2nd petitioner for the non
compliance of an interim direction invoking the
power under Rule 10(1)(a) of the Consumer
Protection Rules 1987. The writ petition was
admitted on 04.05.2010 and the proceedings
before the 1st respondent was stayed by this
Court for a period of one month. The interim
order was subsequently extended until further
orders. Now about 11 years over. It is not
known whether the grievance of respondent Nos.2
and 3 subsist even now. Hence this writ
petition need not kept pending. At this
instance of time, I think Exts.P3 and P4 orders
can be set aside without making any observation
on the merit of the case. The petitioners and
the contesting respondents are free to approach
the 1st respondent for considering the matter
afresh in accordance to law. All the
WP(C) NO.14239/2010
contentions of the petitioners and the
contesting respondents in this writ petition
are left open.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed
in the following manner:
i) Exts.P3 and P4 orders are set
aside.
ii) The petitioners and the contesting
respondents are free to approach the 1st
respondent and raise all their contentions
before the 1st respondent.
iii) The 1st respondent will pass
appropriate orders in accordance to law after
hearing the petitioners and all other affected
parties.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
DM
WP(C) NO.14239/2010
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14239/2010
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT C.C.NO.67
OF 2010 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED
NIL.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED IN
C.C.NO.67 OF 2010 OF THE FIRST
RESPONDENT DATED 8-3-2010.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.77
OF 2010 IN C.C.NO.67 OF 2010 OF THE
FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 18-3-2010.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.100
OF 2010 IN C.C.NO.67 OF 2010 OF THE
FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 19-4-2010.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
