Kerala High Court
M/S.Anugraha Enterprises vs M/S.Poddar Plantations on 26 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 4TH BHADRA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 5309 OF 2016
PETITIONER:
M/S.ANUGRAHA ENTERPRISES
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
SREEKANTH S.,S/O.S.SUDHAKARAN NAIR,
"USHAS", PUTHUPPARIYARAM P.O.,
THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.G.SURESH
SRI.V.HARISH
SRI.RAJAN VISHNURAJ
SRI.G.SUDHEER THURAVOOR
RESPONDENT:
M/S.PODDAR PLANTATIONS
A DIVISION OF RIPPON ESTATE LTD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT AND PRINCIPAL OFFICER,
MR.SUNIL SIVARAMAN, S/O.SIVARAMAN NAIR,
AGED 54 YEARS, RIPPON ESTATE BUNGLOW,
MEPPADI POST, MUPPAINAD AMSOM AND DESOM,
VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT - 673 577.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN
SRI.S.NITHIN ANCHAL
SRI.SABU GEORGE
SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.08.2022, THE COURT ON 26.8.2022 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 5309 of 2020
2
MOHAMMED NIAS. C.P.,J
------------------------
WP(C).No. 5309 of 2016
------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of August, 2022
JUDGMENT
The respondent herein instituted CC No.159 of 2014 before the
Consumer Disputes Rederessal Forum, Wayanad, Kalpetta, in which
the petitioner was the opposite party, wherein by order dated
29.1.2014 , the Forum partly allowed the complaint directing the writ
petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.8,75,000/- to the
respondent/complainant with 12% interest from the date of filing the
complaint till realization and directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as
compensation and Rs.10,000/- as cost to the proceedings. Aggrieved
by the order, the writ petitioner filed an appeal before the State
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum as Appeal No.557 of 2015,
wherein, the appeal was allowed directing the petitioner to deposit
the entire amount covered by the order of the District Forum. The
said direction was not complied with and it resulting in the dismissal
of the appeal. It is these orders of the State Commission that are
challenged in the writ petition.
WP(C).No. 5309 of 2020
3. The respondent herein namely, the complainant filed a
counter affidavit pointing the existence of the alternate remedy
available to the petitioner and stated that the writ petitioner had
received an amount of Rs.8,75,000/- as advance and total amount of
Rs.20,00,000/- was paid under various heads.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned counsel for the respondent.
5. Having considered the rival contentions, I am of the view
that the writ petitioner can be given a chance to contest the case on
merits before the District Forum. Accordingly, the conditions imposed
in Ext.P4 order will stand modified. The writ petitioner will pay an
amount of Rs.15,000/- as cost to the respondent within a period of
one month from today. The other conditions in the order will stand
vacated and the District Forum will consider the complaint on merits
and in accordance with law within a period of three months from the
date of first appearance. The parties are directed to appear before
the District Forum on 23.9.2022. Needless to say that if the cost
directed above is not paid, the impugned orders will stand revived.
The writ petition is disposed as above.
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS. C.P.,JUDGE
dlk 23.8.2022
WP(C).No. 5309 of 2020
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5309/2016
PETITIONER's EXHIBITS
P1 - A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DATED 29.12.2014 BY THE
HON'BLE CDRF, WAYANAD, KALPETTA
P2 - A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DATED 11.09.2015 PASSED BY
THE HON'BLE CDRC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN APPEAL
NO.557/2015
P3 - A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER SHEET OF THE HON'BLE CDRC,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN APPEAL NO.557/2015
P4 - A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DATED 26.10.2015 IN APPEAL
NO.557/2015 BY THE HON'BLE CDRC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
