Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/45/2020

S.Santhanamurthy, S/o. Singaravel, 345, ulundurpet Road, Vayalur, Vridhachalam Town, Cuddalore District. - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. The Sub Registrar Joint 1, Registration Deparrtment, Cuddalore Road, Vridhachalam Town, Cuddalore - Opp.Party(s)

PARTY IN PERSON

28 Apr 2023

ORDER

IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI – 600 003.

BEFORE          Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                           PRESIDENT

                      Thiru. R. VENKATESAPERUMAL                           MEMBER

 

F.A. No.45/2020

 

(Against the Order dt.10.12.2019 made in C.C. No.91/2015 on the file of

D.C.D.R.C., Cuddalore)

DATED THE 28^TH DAY OF APRIL 2023

 

S. Santhanamurthy,

S/o. Singaravel,

No.345, Ulundurpet Road,

Vayalur,

Vridhachalam Town,

Cuddalore District.                                                         .. Appellant / Complainant.       

 

-Versus-

1. The Sub-Registrar Join 1,

Registration Department,

Cuddalore  Road,

Vridhachalam Town,

Cuddalore District.

 

2. The Deputy Collector (Stamps),

District Collector Office,

Cuddalore District.

 

3. The Registrar,

Registration Department,

Head Office,

Santhome,

Chennai – 600 028.                                              .. Respondents / Opposite parties.

 

Appellant / Complainant                                       : Party in person

Counsel for the Respondents / Opposite parties : M/s. K. Kumaran

    

                This appeal coming up before us on 28.04.2023 for appearance of appellant in person and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                                                                

Docket Order

 

Respondent Nos.1 to 3 present.  No representation for the appellant in person.  

This appeal is posted today for appearance of the appellant in person and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal. 

When the matter was called at 10.30 A.M., the appellant was not present.   Hence, passed over and called again at 01.00 P.M. still, there is no representation for the appellant.  Hence, we are of the view that keeping the appeal pending is of no use as the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the case.

Hence, this appeal is dismissed for default.    No costs.

 

               

                Sd/-                                                                                              Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                        R.SUBBIAH                       

             MEMBER                                                                                     PRESIDENT