SURESH NATHAN Vs. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner had filed C.C. No.102/2019 (Ext.P1 complaint) and C.C.No.103/2019 before the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ('Commission', for brevity) on 5/8/2019, against the respondents 2 to 6. Respondents 2 to 6 had entered appearance in the two complaints and filed their versions. The complaints were posted together on 8/4/2020. On the said day, the complaints were adjourned to 4/6/2024. On 4/6/2024, the Commission adjourned Ext.P1 complaint to 17/10/2024. However, on the said posting date, by Ext.P3 order, the complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution. Immediately, the petitioner filed Ext.P4 application under Sec. 50 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ('Act', for short) to review Ext.P3 order. But, by Ext.P5 order, the Commission dismissed Ext.P4 review petition. Exts.P3 and P5 are illegal and erroneous. Hence, the writ petition.

(2.) Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 6.

(3.) When the writ petition came up for consideration on 20/1/2025, this Court had called for the proceedings sheet of Ext.P1 complaint from the Commission, which was transmitted to this Court.