IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 4TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 13TH BHADRA 1930 WA.No. 1834 of 2008 ------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.27230/2005 Dated 25/07/2008 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------ K.M.SAJAN, KANJIRAMKUZHICKAL HOUSE, RACKADU, MEKADAMBU, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJESH RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL STATE COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. 3. SALI JACOB, KOTTANADAN HOUSE, RAYAMANGALAM P.O., KARUPPUMPADY. 4. ABDUL RASHEED, OLICKAL HOUSE, EAST VAZHAPILLY, MULAVOOR, MUVATTUPUZHA. 5. M.C.GEORGE, METHECKAL HOUSE, PAINGOTTOOR P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM. 6. K.M.SAJEEV SIGNALS AUTO LAND, VELLOORKUNNAM, MUVATTUPUZHA. R1, R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------------------------- W.A.No.1834 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 4th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. This appeal is directed against the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.27230/2005 dated 25th July, 2008. 2. In the writ petition filed, the petitioner had sought for two reliefs. Firstly, to direct the first respondent in the writ petition to dispose of the Restoration Petition 107 of 2004 in R.P.No.11 of 2003 within a particular time frame. The other prayer was to direct the second respondent not to issue arrest warrants against the petitioner for the execution of orders issued against the firm Signal Auto Land. 3. The learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to dispose of the Restoration Petition 107 of 2004 filed in R.P.11 of 2003 within six months from the date of receipt of this Court's order. The Court has also observed in its order that the interim order granted shall enure to the benefit of the petitioner. 4. As we have already indicated, there are two prayers in W.A.No.1834/2008 -2- the writ petition and those prayers are granted by the learned Single Judge. In that view of the matter, we do not see any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge which would call for our interference. Accordingly, the writ appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. 5. I.A.No.810/2008 is closed. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE MS