IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32541 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- M/S.INTEGRATED FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, "VAIRAMS", 112, THYAGARAYA ROAD, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI-600 017, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY-MR.GEORGE JOSEPH. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN SRI.TERRY V.JAMES SRI.B.J.JOHN PRAKASH RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- MOHAN PAUL, PROPRIETOR, JOSE THEATRE, THRISSUR-1. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 32541 OF 2010 (P) ===================== Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner herein is the opposite party in CC No.599/06 filed by the respondent before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Trichur. That case was decided by the CDRF ex parte by Ext.P1 order. Subsequently, on coming to know of the further proceedings taken by the complainant by filing EA 25/08, petitioner filed appeal before the Sate Commission along with an application for condonation of delay. The application for condonation of delay was rejected by the State Commission by Ext.P7 order and consequently the appeal itself was also dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Revision Petition Nos.2254/10 and 2255/10 before th National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi. These revisions are pending and meanwhile warrant ordered by the CDRF, Trichur in EA 25/08 is sought to be enforced against the petitioner. It is aggrieved by the above, the writ petition is filed. 2. I heard the senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. WPC No. 32541/10 :2 : 3. Now that the petitioner has filed Revision Petition Nos.2254 and 2255/10 before the National Commission and as the revisions are pending, I feel it is premature to enforce warrant ordered by the CDRF in EA No.25/08. In that view of the mater, I dispose of this writ petition directing the CDRF, Trichur to keep in abeyance, the warrant ordered against the petitioner, until the disposal of the Revision Petition Nos.2254/10 and 2255/10 now pending before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp