Dismissed

3 Bens Constructions v. Bency Raghavan

Kerala HC25 May 2022OP(C)/1004/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an original petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by judgment debtors challenging an order of the Kerala State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission. The petitioners sought a stay on an appeal already filed before the National Commission, arguing the remedy lies there. The High Court, upon hearing, allowed the petition to be withdrawn and dismissed it as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

The original petition was dismissed as the same was allowed to be withdrawn.

3 Bens Constructions Vs Bency Raghavan — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1944

¶5

OP(C) NO. 1004 OF 2019

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 94/2014 OF KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL,COMMISSION.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶7

PETITIONERS/JUDGMENT DEBTORS/OPPOSITE PARTIES:

¶8

1 3 BENS CONSTRUCTIONS

¶9

HAVING ITS OFFICE AT VALLIKAVU,
NILAMPODINJA NEDUMKUNNAM.P.O,
CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SABU JOSEPH,
AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, VALIYA PURUPAKKATTU VEEDU,
NILAMPODINJA, NEDUMKUNNAM.P.O, CHANGANASSERY,
KOTTAYAM, PIN-686542.

¶10

2 SABU JOSEPH AGED 41 YEARS

¶11

S/O.JOSEPH, VALIYA PURUPAKKATTU VEEDU,
NILAMPODINJA, NEDUMKUNNAM.P.O,
CHANGANASSERRY, KOTTAYAM,PIN-686542.

¶12

3JOSEPH @ SCARIA JOHN,
AGED 65 YEARS
VALIYA PURAPAKKATTU VEEDU, NILAMPODINJA,
NEDUMKUNNAM.P.O, CHANGANASSERY,
KOTTAYAM, PIN-686542.

¶13

BY ADV NOBLE MATHEW

¶14

RESPONDENTS/DECREE HOLDER/COMPLAINANT:

¶15

1BENCY RAGHAVAN
S/O RAGHAVAN, KARIMPOLIL, ANICADU.P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.65/1, BEACHER
ROAD,DEHRADUN CANTT, DEHRADUN, UTTARAKHAND.

¶16

*Addl.R2 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR ( RR) CHANGANASSERY TALUK, CHANGANASSERY P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT PIN 686 101.

¶17

¶18

OP(C) NO. 1004 OF 2019

¶19

*Addl.R3THE VILLAGE OFFICER.
NEDUMKUNNAM, NEDUMKUNNAM P.O,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN 686 542.

¶20

ADDITIONAL R2 AND R3 IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED
29.04.2022 IN I.A.NO.2/2022

¶21

BY ADVS.
UNNIKRISHNAN G
BOBBY U. NAIR(K/002526/1999)
SRI.DENNY DEVASSY, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶22

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶23

OP(C) NO. 1004 OF 2019

¶24

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

Dated this the 25^th day of May, 2022

¶27

In this Original Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, who are the judgment debtors, impugn order dated 22.02.2019 in E.A.No.15/2016 in C.C.No.94/2014 of Kerala State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram.

¶28

When the case is taken up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that appeal challenging the order in C.C.No.94/2014 already filed before the National Commission. Therefore, the remedy, if any, for the petitioners is before the Appellate Forum and there is no reason for this Court to continue the proceedings further since the petitioners can very well canvass the remedy in the matter of execution of the order impugned before the Appellate Forum. Accordingly, the learned counsel sought permission to withdraw this petition.

¶29

OP(C) NO. 1004 OF 2019

¶30

¶31

The learned Government Pleader appears for the

¶32

State.

¶33

In view of the matter, this Original Petition stands

¶34

dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/-

A. BADHARUDEEN

JUDGE

nkr

OP(C) NO. 1004 OF 2019

¶41

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1004/2019

¶42

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶43

EXHIBIT P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY
THE COMMISSION IN CC NO.94/2014 DATED
30.O9.2015.

¶44

EXHIBIT P2THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO WITH ORDER IN
THIS REGARD

¶45

EXHIBIT P3THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY
THE COMMISSION IN CC NO.94/2014 DATED
22/2/2019

¶46

EXHIBIT P4THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
22/02/2019 IN E A NO.15/2016 IN CC
94/2014 OF THE STATE COMMISSION.

¶47

Exhibit P5THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE
DATED 30-10-2021 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY
TAHSILDAR (RR), CHANGANASSEERY TO THE
PETITIONERS.

¶48

Exhibit P6THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR
ATTACHING THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTY DATED
30-10-2021 ISSUED BYTHE DEPUTY
TAHSILDAR (RR) CHANGANASSERY TALUK TO
THE PETITIONER.

3 Bens Constructions v. Bency Raghavan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

3 Bens Constructions v. Bency Raghavan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.G.Thampi, Vs Jyothis

P.C.Chacko Vs Palackal Timbers

Runs Mon Vs Simpol

Fathima Beevi Vs Abdul Rasakh

Biju P., Vs Indian Pentecostal Church of God

Devan Vs State of Kerala