Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

M/S Santhimadom Builders And ... vs Sebastian K.K on 4 February, 2025

Author: C.S.Dias

Bench: C.S.Dias

WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024              1


                                                    2025:KER:8961
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

  TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 15TH MAGHA, 1946

                         WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024

        AGAINST    THE   ORDER/JUDGMENT    DATED   31.01.2015   IN   CC

NO.28     OF     2012    OF   K.S.CONSUMER    DISP.REDRESSAL,COMN.,

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PETITIONERS:

    1       M/S SANTHIMADOM BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS
            REGD. OFFICE, SOUTH NALUVAZHY, NORTH PARAVUR,
            ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN
            V.N.RADHAKRISHNAN, PIN - 683513

    2       V.N.RADAKRISHNAN
            AGED 72 YEARS
            CHAIRMAN, SANTHIMADOM BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS,
            S/O NARAYANAN, SANTHIMADOM, SOUTH NALUVAZHY, NORTH
            PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683513

    3       RAGESH MANU
            AGED 35 YEARS
            S/O RADAKRISHNAN, SANTHIMADOM, SOUTH NALUVAZHY,
            NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683513

    4       RAMANI RADAKRISHNAN
            AGED 71 YEARS
            W/O RADAKRISHNAN, SANTHIMADOM, SOUTH NALUVAZHY,
            NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683513

    5       MANJUSHA
            AGED 42 YEARS
            D/O V.N. RADAKRISHNAN, SANTHIMADOM, SOUTH
            NALUVAZHY, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.,
            PIN - 683513
 WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024               2


                                                 2025:KER:8961
     6     RENJISHA
           AGED 45 YEARS
           D/O V.N. RADAKRISHNAN, SANTHIMADOM, SOUTH
           NALUVAZHY, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.,
           PIN - 683513


           BY ADVS. SRI.ANOOP KRISHNA
           SRI.V.A.PRADEEP KUMAR
           SMT.JENNY THANKAM




RESPONDENTS:

     1     SEBASTIAN K.K.
           S/O KUNJIPALU, FLAT NO 3, VYSHALI CO-OPERATIVE
           HOUSING SOCVIETY, VIMAN NAGAR, PUNE, MAHARASTRA,
           PIN - 411014

     2     REENA SEBASTIAN
           W/O SEBASTIAN, FLAT NO 3, VYSHALI CO-OPERATIVE
           HOUSING SOCVIETY, VIMAN NAGAR, PUNE, MAHARASTRA,
           PIN - 411014

     3     UNION OF INDIA
           REP BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
           DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER PROTECTION AND AFFAIRS, NEW
           DELHI, PIN - 110001


           BY ADVS. SRI.SHYAM KRISHNAN
           SRI.N.B.SUNILNATH(K/948/1999)
           SRI.GENS GEORGE ELAVINAMANNIL(K/670/2008)
           SRI.S.K.HARISH(K/000215/1988)
           SRI.T.C.KRISHNA, DSGI


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON   04.02.2025,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024          3


                                                        2025:KER:8961




                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 04th day of February, 2025 The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P1 judgment passed by the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram ('the Commission', in short).

2. The respondents 1 and 2 had filed C.C.No.28/2012 before the Commission seeking for recovery of money and other ancillary reliefs. By Ext.P1 judgment dated 31.01.2015, the Commission has allowed the complaint. Ext.P1 is illegal and arbitrary, because the Commission has not considered the various legal contentions raised by the petitioner. In WP(C) No.14916/2024, this Court had referred a similar matter to mediation. The petitioners do not have any alternative or efficacious remedy. Hence, the writ petition.

WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024 4

2025:KER:8961

3. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the respondents and the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India.

4. Admittedly, Ext.P1 judgment has been passed by the Commission on 31.01.2015 under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, 'the Act'). The Act is a self contained code. As per Section 19 of the Act, any person aggrieved by an order passed by the Commission has to prefer an appeal before the National Commission within a period of thirty days from the date of the order. It is nine years after the passing of the Ext.P1 judgment, that the petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging the judgment before this Court, without resorting to its statutory remedy provided under the Act.

5. Interpreting the provisions of the Act, the Honourable Supreme Court in Cicily Kallarackal v. Vehicle Factory [2012 (8) SCC 524] has held that the High Court shall not exercise its plenary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to interfere with WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024 5 2025:KER:8961 orders passed under the Act because of the alternative remedy contained in the Act.

6. In Regional Cancer Center, Tvm v. Kerala State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Tvm and Others [2021 (5) KHC 236] a Division Bench of this Court has held as follows:

"14. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is a self contained and a complete mechanism for redressal of the consumers related grievances by filing complaint, appeal and revision from the District Forum up to the Supreme Court subject to limits of jurisdiction provided therein. When hierarchy of remedies are provided under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the appellant has to avail the remedy under the said Act. Ext.P10 order passed by the State Commission is revisable before the National commission under S.21(b). The appellant having contested the claim before the CDRF on merits and subjected itself to the jurisdiction of the CDRF and further elected the remedy available to it by challenging the order of the CDRF before the State Commission by preferring appeal under S.15 of the Act, cannot switch over to another remedy in midway, even assuming such remedy by way of a writ petition is available to the appellant. We find no exceptional or extra ordinary circumstances warranting interference with the order of the State Commission invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Art.226 of the Constitution of India."

7. In view of the alternative and efficacious remedy provided under the Act and the exposition of law in the afore cited decisions, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition.

WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024 6

2025:KER:8961 Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to work out their remedies in accordance with law.

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS, JUDGE NAB WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024 7 2025:KER:8961 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15752/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD IN CC NO 28/2012 PASSED BY THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 31.01.2015 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT OF ARREST DATED 07-02-2017, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM, AGAINST PETITIONERS 2 TO 6.

EXHIBIT R1(b) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT OF ARREST DATED 10-12-2017, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM, AGAINST PETITIONERS 2 TO 6.

EXHIBIT R1(c) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT OF ARREST DATED 07-03-2018, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRISSUR, AGAINST PETITIONERS 2 TO 6.

EXHIBIT R1(d) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 18-07- 2019, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 2ND PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(e) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 18-07- 2019, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 3RD PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(f) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 18-07- 2019, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 4TH PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(g) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 18-07- 2019, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 5TH PETITIONER. WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024 8

2025:KER:8961 EXHIBIT R1(h) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 18-07- 2019, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 6TH PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(i) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 23-02- 2022, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE POLICE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 2ND PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(j) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 23-02- 2022, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE POLICE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 3RD PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(k) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 23-02- 2022, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION OF POLICE TO THE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 4TH PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(l) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 23-02- 2022, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE POLICE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 5TH PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(m) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 23-02- 2022, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE POLICE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 6TH PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(n) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT OF ARREST DATED 26-07-2022, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), THRISSUR, AGAINST PETITIONER NOS.1 TO 6 EXHIBIT R1(o) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 28-02- 2023, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 2ND PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(p) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 28-02- 2023, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 3RD PETITIONER WP(C) NO. 15752 OF 2024 9 2025:KER:8961 EXHIBIT R1(q) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 28-02- 2023, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 4TH PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(r) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 28-02- 2023, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 5TH PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(s) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT DATED 28-02- 2023, ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSION TO THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THRISSUR, AGAINST THE 6TH PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(t) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 11-03- 2022, SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRISSUR. EXHIBIT R1(u) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 11-03- 2022, ISSUED BY THE CITY POLICE OFFICE, THRISSUR TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R1(v) TRUE COPY OF THE THE JUDGEMENT DATED 06- 12-2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P. (C) NO. 5581/2020 EXHIBIT R1(w) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19-03-2024 IN E.P. NO. 25/2015 OF THE HON'BLE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM EXHIBIT R1(x) TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT-REPORT DATED 28-05-2024, SUBMITTED BY THE INSPECTOR, NORTH PARAVUR POLICE STATION TO THE HON'BLE COMMISSION WITH TYPED COPY