The High Court's jurisdiction to intervene in consumer disputes is limited and should not be exercised if effective statutory remedies are available.

1.Heard on admission and question of maintainability of the petitions.
This batch of petitions involve common question of law. Therefore, all the petitions are being disposed of by this common order.

2. W.P. (227) Nos. 1520/09, 1532/09, 1531/09, 1524/09, 1539/09, 1522/09, 1521/09, 1545/09, 1197/09, 2121/09, 2123/09, 1913/09, 1916/09, 1917/09, 1930/09, 2122/09, 2239/09, 2094/09, 2096/09, 1202/09, 2116/09, 2237/09, 2120/09, 2240/09, 2238/09, 2242/09, 2241/09, 284/09, 247/09, 282/09, 283/09, 248/09, 1193/09, 1921/09, 1928/09, 1919/09, 7051/08, 1203/09, 416/09, 411/09, 246/09, 6951/08, 6947/08, 6949/08, 6950/08, 1198/09 and 281/09 are directed against the order passed by the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Raipur, (for short 'State Commission'), whereby and whereunder the State Commission has dismissed the appeal on account of refusal to comply Second Proviso to S.15 of the Consumer Protection Act , 1986 (for short 'the Act, 1986') by the petitioner. These petitions have been preferred by the petitioner seeking inter alia following reliefs :
i. That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the entire records of the case from Distt. Forum Durg and State Commission, Rapier.
ii. That, the order passed by the Distt. Forum be modified to the extent of absolving the petitioner from the responsibility of payment of amount of the bounced cheque issued by respondent No. 2 along with compensation, cost, interest etc. for which he has been severally and jointly held liable.
iii. That the order passed by the learned State Commission be quashed in the ends of justice.

3. Remaining petitions i.e. W.P. (227) Nos. 483/09, 484/09, 564/09, 594/09, 624/09, 1204/09, 455/09, 2223/09, 539/09, 1201/09, 711/09, 794/09, 705/09, 1199/09, 450/09, 452/09, 1190/09, 1192/09, 1189/09, 1206/09, 1194/09, 1195/09, 2367/09, 2368/09, 1914/09, 2363/09, 1196/09, 2364/09, 2366/09, 2377/09, 2365/09, 683/09, 1191/09, 1205/09, 1918/09, 1922/09, 1657/09, 1658/09, 540/09, 795/09, 593/09 and 706/09 are directly preferred by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Drug, (for short 'Distt. Forum), whereby and whereunder the Distt. Forum has allowed the petition of complainants and passed the order for payment of compensation against the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 2. These petitions have been preferred by the petitioner seeking inter alia following reliefs :
i. That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the entire records of the case from Distt. Forum Durg.
ii. That, the order passed by the Distt. Forum be modified to the extent of absolving the petitioner from the responsibility of payment of amount of the bounced cheque issued by respondent No. 2 along with compensation, cost, interest etc. for which he has been severally and jointly held liable.
iii. That, the execution proceedings initiated by the Distt. Forum Durg may be deferred till decision of this petition for which an ad - interim application is being filed before this Hon'ble Court.

4. The brief facts of the case are that, Andaman Gateways Tour and Travel Pvt. Ltd., Chennai (for short 'Company'), a company said to be registered under the Companies Act and having its Branch Office at Dillan Complex, IInd Floor, Akash Ganga Supela, Bhilai, Distt. Durg, collected money from various persons / complainants in order to provide tour package from Bhilai to Andaman Island. The various persons deposited the requisite amount with the petitioner. According to such persons / complainants, the petitioner, who is Director of the said company, collected the money from them but, in some cases journey was not arranged since