Petitioners approached this Court challenging the interim order passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Idukki. This interim order is passed to inspect the disputed cement and ascertain the matters mentioned in the commission application. Petitioners also raised certain allegations against the President of the forum. Petitioners also challenged jurisdiction of the forum in passing Ext.P8 order.
2. According to the petitioners, Ext.P8 order is not served on them. The appointment of an expert Commissioner is to obtain a piece of evidence in proceedings before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. If the evidence is obtained without hearing, no prejudice will be caused to the petitioners unless the petitioners demonstrates the manner in which the evidence taken has caused prejudice to them. Therefore, it is for the petitioners to raise their objection regarding prejudice that will be resulted on account of obtaining certain piece of evidence. These are matters petitioners can place before the forum. I am sure, if the petitioners raise such objection before the forum, forum will advert to the objection of W.P(C).Nos.474 and 6479 of 2014 2 the petitioners. Further, invoking Art.226 of the Constitution, this Court is not expected to interfere with any proceedings of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum which has not attained finality. The petitioners can also challenge the interim order along with the final order if the final order is passed adversely against them. Petitioners have an alternative remedy before the Consumer State Commission. Petitioners allegation is that President of the forum is biased against them. Learned Senior Counsel for the President submits that President is due to retirement on 23.12.2014. Though, there is nothing on record to substantiate the claim of the petitioners. However in the interest of justice, the forum shall take up the matter after the retirement of the President.
The Writ Petitions are disposed of.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.
Sbna/05/11/14