State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
G.Thankamma vs R.Appukuttan Pillai on 3 September, 2008
.
CDRC, Sisuvihar Lane, Sasthamangalam.P.O, Trivandrum-10
Appeal(A) No. 639/2004
G.Thankamma
...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
R.Appukuttan Pillai
Ponnamma Amma
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
1. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU
2. SMT.VALSALA SARNGADHARAN
3. SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. G.Thankamma
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. R.Appukuttan Pillai
2. Ponnamma Amma
For the Appellant :
1. P.Sankara Pillai
For the Respondent :
1.
2.
ORDER
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHPURAM APPEAL NO.639/04 JUDGMENT DATED: 3/9/08 PRESENT:-
SRI.M.V.VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI.S.CHANDRA MOHAN : MEMBER G.Thankamma, daughter of Kochukunju, : APPELLANT residing at Mukaluvila Veedu, Perumpuzha P.O. Kundara, Kollam. (By Adv.P.Sankara Pillai & Sajan) Vs 1. R.Appukuttan Pillai, aged 58 years, son of Ramakrishna Pillai residing at Abhilash Bhavan (Puthu Veetil) Perumpuzha P.O., Kundara, Elampalloor Village, Kollam. : RESPONDENTS 2.Ponnamma Amma residing at -do- JUDGMENT SRI.M.V.VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER
The above appeal is preferred against the order dated 23/6/04 passed by CDRF, Kollam in OP No.172/03. The complaint therein was filed claiming the amount due to the complainant under chitty which was conducted by the 1st opposite party as the Foreman. The 1st opposite party entered appearance and contended that the insolvency petition is pending before the Sub Court, Kollam and the complainant was well aware of the pendency of the insolvency petition before the Sub Court, Kollam. It is further contended that the complainants husband is a party in the said proceedings. In the light of the pendency of insolvency the proceedings before the Sub Court, Kollam the Forum below was reluctant to go into the merits of the complaint in OP 172/03. Thereby, the complaint in OP 172/03 was dismissed. It is against the said order the present appeal is filed by the complainant.
2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant/complainant. There was no representation for the respondents/opposite parties. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the Forum below would make it clear that the appellant/complainant was well aware we are of the pendency of the insolvency petition filed by the 1st opposite party before the Sub Court, Kollam. The Forum below can be justified in dismissing the said complaint on the ground that insolvency petition filed the 1st opposite party is pending before the Sub Court, Kollam. We do not find any material irregularity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the Forum below. It is also to be noted that the appellant/complainant can very well Join in the aforesaid insolvency proceedings and thereby she can get her grievances redressed. No materials prejudice or inconvenience will be caused to the appellant/complainant. We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Forum below.
In the result the appeal is dismissed. The parties are directed to suffer their respective cost.
M.V.VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER S.CHANDRA MOHAN NAIR : MEMBER Pk.
......................
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU ......................
SMT.VALSALA SARNGADHARAN ......................
SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA