IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 28341 of 2006(Y) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- AARALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.F.1515, P.O.ARALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. VETTIKKATTIL GEORGE, S/O.KURIAKOSE, VETTIKKATIIL HOUSE, VALANTHODE, P.O. EDAPUZHA, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. NARANGAMURIYIL ARUNAN, S/O.KUNHIPILLA, NARANGAMURIYIL HOUSE, VALATHODE, P.O.EDAPUZHA. 3. KATTUKUZHIYIL DASAN, S/O.CHELLAPPAN, KATTUKUZHIYIL HOUSE, P.O. EDAPUZHA. 4. THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR, REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. NOBLE MATHEW - R5 ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN FOR R1,R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/09/2008 ALONG WITH WPC NO. 28380 OF 2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.28341/2006 Y APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT 1 TO 3 AS CC NO.202/06 BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KANNUR. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY CONSUMER FORUM TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 18/09/06. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C) Nos.28341 & 28380 of 2006 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner Society is aggrieved by the notice issued by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur. According to the Society, the petition is not maintainable. Reliance is placed on the Bench decision of this court in General Manager v. Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, 2000 (2) KLT 195 and Fon-Ess India (P) Ld. v. Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, 2006 (3) KLT 500. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the question of jurisdiction is one to be raised before the Forum itself and it is for the Forum to examine the issue, particularly when the deficiency of service is alleged in the complaint. It is a well settled proposition that the question of jurisdiction is one to be raised before the Forum itself. Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of making it clear that the question of maintainability will be decided as a preliminary point after adverting to the contentions taken by the parties. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) ahg. KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------- W.P(C) Nos.28341 & 28380 of 2006 ----------------------------------- JUDGMENT 1st September, 2008