AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Viju Abraham, J
Petitioner is the opposite party No.1 in C.C.No.15 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent. Petitioner submits that due to Covid-19 pandemic they could not effectively prosecute the matter before the 1st respondent District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and thereupon the petitioner has filed a petition as I.A.No.305 of 2021 seeking an opportunity to cross-examine PW1 who is the complainant in the proceedings. That was rejected by Ext.P1 order. Challenging Ext.P1 the petitioner has preferred Revision Petition No.29 of 2022 before the 2nd respondent Kerala State Consumer Redressal Commission. The same was also rejected by Ext.P3 order. Now the petitioner submits that they intended to challenge Ext.P3 order before the National Consumer Redressal Commission. But in the meanwhile the proceedings before the 1st respondent is posted to 24.04.2023 for orders. Petitioner submits that a breathing time may be granted so as to enable the petitioner to approach the National Consumer Redressal Commission challenging Ext.P3 order.
Therefore, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent not to proceed further in C.C.No.15 of 2016 for a period of three weeks from today so as to enable the petitioner to approach the National Consumer Redressal Commission challenging Ext.P3 order.
With the above limited direction the writ petition is disposed of.