IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21087 of 2011(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LTD,NO.123, ANGAPPA NAICKEN STREET,CHENNAI-600001,THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE,39/3500,1ST FLOOR,MANIKKATH CROSS ROAD,RAVIPURAM,ERNAKULAM REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,SMITHA A.T.,LEGAL OFFICER,M/S.SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LTD. BY ADV. SRI.R.PREMCHAND SMT.A.A.DILSHAH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, KATHRIKADAVU, ERNAKULAM,PIN 682017. 2. DEEPU.M.S,, MOOLAYIL HOUSE, MUDAVOOR P.O., VAZHAPPILLY, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN 687669. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 21087 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT DATED 24.3.2007 EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P3 : ORIGINAL OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 1.3.2011 (True copy) P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).21087/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Ext.P3 order passed by the first respondent is under challenge in this writ petition. In my view, Ext.P3 is an order against which an appeal provided under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is maintainable. Having regard to the alternate statutory remedy available to the petitioner, I decline to entertain this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs