IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 29024 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED, 101, SANTHOME HIGH ROAD, CHENNAI-600028, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL LEGAL MANAGER (SOUTH) MR.GANESH PARAMESWARAN. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.V.J.ANAND RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VAZHUTHACAUD, SASTHAMANGALAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-10, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM. 3. MR.V.T.SREEDHARAN MASTER, VELLANI HOUSE, ERIKKAMANNA, PONNANI P.O. 4. MR.MOHANAN, AGENT, HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD., RESIDING AT SAUBHAGYA, CHAMRAVATTOM JUNCTION PONNANI P.O. 5. PONNANI STORES, CHAMRAVATTOM JUNCTION, PONNANI P.O., PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY G.P.SRI.K.RAMESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONERS EXTS: EXT.P1:- COPY OF ADVERTISEMENT DTD.1.2.2004 EXT.P2:- COPY OF PRIZE WINNING WRAPPER EXT.P3:- COPY OF ADVERTISEMENT DTD.15.2.2004 EXT.P4:- COPY OF COMPLAINT OF R3 BEFORE THE CDRF, MALAPPURAM EXT.P5:- COPY OF VERSION FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE R2 IN OP 15/2005 EXT.P6:- COPY OF ORDER OF R2 IN OP 15/2005 EXT.P7:- COPY OF JUDGMENT OF R1 IN APPEAL NO.94/2008 EXT.P8:- COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY R2 RESPONDENTS EXTS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE S.SIRI JAGAN, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.29024 of 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges an order of the Kerala State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission. I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction to interfere with Ext.P7 judgment, since the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy by way of revision before the National Commission. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the impugned order in revision before the National Commission appropriately. To enable the petitioner to file a revision and seek interim orders, I direct that the interim order passed in this writ petition would continue to be in force for a period of two months. Counsel for the petitioner seeks a direction to the effect that the period during which the writ petition was pending before this court may be excluded for the purpose of limitation. It is for the petitioner to plead the same before the National Commission and seek orders in respect thereof. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE cms