IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2009 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 30427 of 2004(V) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- SUBHASH VARMA, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, SATHYAM DETECTIVE AGENCY, A1-MANNAR COMPLEX, JOSE JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM. BY MS.N.SUDHA DEVI, ADVOCATE. MS.R.ASALETHA VARMA, ADVOCATE. MS.P.M.SWAYAM PRABHA, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENT: ---------------- ARAVINDAN MANIKOTH, EDITOR, MALAYALAM DAILY, KOVALLPELLY, KANHANGAD. BY MR.K.RAJEEVAN, ADVOCATE. MR.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN, ADVOCATE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.30427/2004 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF the ORDER IN I.A.No.214/2003 OF THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGODE DTD. 29.12.2003. EXT. P2 : COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P.169/03 IN I.A.214/2003 BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGODE, DATED 29.1.2004. EXT. P3 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD. 7.6.2004 IN W.P.(C) No.12130/2004 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT. P4 : COPY OF LETTER DTD. 14.7.2004 SENT BY C.D.R.F., KASARAGODE TO THE PETITIONER. EXT. P5 : COPY OF LETTER DTD. 28.7.2004 SENT BY PETITIONER TO THE PRESIDENT, C.D.R.F., KASARAGODE. EXT. P6 : COPY OF ORDER DTD. 18.8.2004 IN O.P.169/2003 OF the C.D.R.F., KASARAGODE. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.30427 of 2004 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 26th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Prayer sought in this writ petition is to direct the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to number the appeal filed by the petitioner, considering the deposit made by him before the CDRF, Kasaragode as in compliance of the 2 nd proviso to Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act. There is an alternative prayer to allow the petitioner to withdraw the amount deposited. 2. Facts of the case show that the respondent herein filed OP No.169/2003 before the CDRF, Kasaragode against the petitioner. The case was decided exparte and the petitioner applied for setting the order aside, and that was allowed on condition of remittance of Rs.12,000/- by the petitioner. That condition was not complied with and therefore, the application was dismissed by Ext.P1. That was challenged before this Court in WP(C) No.12130/2004. By Ext.P3 judgment dated 07/06/2004, this Court enlarged the time and accordingly amount was deposited. 3. Though the complaint was restored to file, the same was WP(C) No.30427/2004 -2- again rejected exparte. Subsequently, the petitioner has filed this writ petition contending that he has filed an appeal before the State Commission and that the amount deposited by the petitioner in compliance with Exts.P1 & P2 should be treated as one satisfying the requirement of the proviso to Section 15 of the Act. 4. I heard the learned counsel for the respondent also. 5. As already noticed, the deposit made by the petitioner was in compliance of Exts.P1 & P2, and unless the State Commission allows, this payment cannot be treated as a deposit in compliance to the proviso to Section 15 of the Act, which provides for deposit for maintaining the appeal. That apart, if at all, the petitioner seeks any direction in this behalf, the remedy available to the petitioner is to seek orders from the State Commission itself rather than from this Court. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the State Commission for appropriate orders. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg