IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 22178 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE KATTAKAMPAL CHITTIES AND LOANS (P) LIMITED, CHIRAKKAL KATTAKAMBAL, TRISSUR, REP.BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI.GEORGE S/O.MATHEW, PULIKKOTTIL HOUSE, TRICHUR. BY ADV. \RI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- A.B.VEERAN, AGED 85 YEARS, S/O.LATE BAPPU, ATTINKARA HOUSE, CHIRAKKAL,PO, KATTAKAMBAL, THRISSUR-680 604. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 22178 of 2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 15th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Chitty Company. In respect of payment of chitty amount due to the respondent, there is some dispute. The petitioner claims that the amount due to the respondent has been adjusted towards the amount due from him in respect of another chitty in which the respondent was a guarantor. There was a suit also between the parties as O.S. No. 844/1999 in which, the petitioner alleges that there was a direction allowing the petitioner to adjust the amount due to the petitioner from the amount due to the respondent. The petitioner submits that without disclosing these facts, the respondent filed a complaint before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thrissur in which without considering the contentions of the petitioner an order was passed, namely, Ext. P4, directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 60,000/- with 6% interest along with costs of Rs. 1,000/-. According to the petitioner, since it was passed without considering the contentions of the petitioner, the petitioner filed a Review petition, which was not disposed of. Thereafter, the respondent filed an execution petition which is being posted for further proceedings . In view of the filing of the execution proceedings, the petitioner filed an appeal against Ext. P4 order as Appeal No. 352/2010 before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, along with a petition to condone delay and a petition for stay of further recovery proceedings of the amount. The petitioner submits that it would take some time for the Commission to consider the petition to condone the delay and in the meanwhile, if the order of the Forum is executed, the petitioner would be put to irreparable injury and loss. Therefore, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: W.P.C. No. 22178/2010. -: 2 :- “1. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to consider and pass orders on the petition seeking to stay all further proceedings pursuant to Ext. P4 order of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Trissur and consider and pass orders on the appeal filed by the petitioner within a reasonable time. 2. Writ in the nature of mandamus to stay all further proceedings in the Execution Application at Ext. P5 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Trissur till the appeal and petitions before the State Commission is heard and disposed of.” 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. I find that the oder of the Forum, Ext. P4, is dated 12.1.2009. The petitioner has not taken any steps to challenge the same within a reasonable time. Even Ext. P 7 review petition, if at all maintainable was filed only on 26-5-2010. The petitioner filed the appeal only on 28-6-2010 with a petition to condone delay. In view of the same, the petitioner is not entitled to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. However, I make it clear that if any amount is realised from the petitioner pursuant to execution proceedings , that would be subject to the result of the appeal pending before the Commission. I further make it clear that any findings in this judgment shall not be taken as a consideration of any matter involved in the appeal before the Commission on merits and the Commission shall dispose of the same independently. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.