Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/254/2019

R.Ranganathan, S/o.Mr.Rajan, No.18, Subbu Street, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai 600 041. - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.The Chairman, TANGEDCO TNEB, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.And 2 Others - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.V.Athi Kesavan

12 Apr 2022

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.254/2019

 

(Against the Order dt.28.11.2018 made in C.C. No.257/2017 on the file of

D.C.D.R.C., Chennai (South))

DATED THE 12^TH DAY OF APRIL 2022

 

R. Ranganathan,

S/o. Mr. Rajan,

No.18, Subbu Street,

Thiruvanmiyur,

Chennai – 600 041.                                                                                                                .. Appellant / Complainant.

-Versus-

 

1. The Chairman,

TANGEDCO (TNEB),

Anna Salai,

Chennai – 600 002.       

 

2. The Deputy Financial Controller,

TNEB,

K.K. Nagar,

Chennai.

 

3. The Assistant Engineer,

O & M, TNEB,

Sasthri Nagar,

(CEDC / South),

Besant Nagar,

Chennai – 600 090.                                                                                                         .. Respondents / Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for Appellant / Complainant     : M/s. V. Athikesavan

Respondents / Opposite parties            : M/s. Hemalatha Gajapathy

          This appeal coming up before us on 12.04.2022 for appearance of the appellant and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                                                                

 

Docket Order

 

No representation for appellant.   Respondent present.  This appeal is posted today for appearance of appellant 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 01.15 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, the appeal is dismissed for default.   No order as to costs.

 

 

               

               Sd/-                                                                                                              Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                         R.SUBBIAH                        

             MEMBER                                                                                           PRESIDENT