Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

FA/23/2013

SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THE BRANCH MANAGER - Complainant(s)

Versus

A. VIJAYAKUMARI - Opp.Party(s)

K.S. RAMAKRISHNAN

30 Mar 2022

ORDER

IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI – 600 003.

BEFORE         Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                        PRESIDENT

                      Thiru. S. KARUPPIAH                                             JUDICIAL MEMBER

                      Thiru. R. VENKATESAPERUMAL                          MEMBER

 

F. A. No.23/2013

 

(Against the Order dt.26.11.2012 made in C.C. No.100/2012 on the file of

D.C.D.R.C., Coimbatore)

DATED THE 30^TH DAY OF MARCH 2022

 

The Branch Manager,

Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited,

2^nd Floor, Rajkamal Towers,

No.309, Avinashi Road,

Peelamedu,

Coimbatore.                                                                     .. Appellant / 1^st Opposite party.

-Versus-

1. Mrs. A. Vijayakumari,

W/o. Mr. S. Anandan,

No.20, Chinnasamy Street,

K.K. Puthur,

Saibaba Colony,

Coimbatore – 641 038.                                                  .. 1^st Respondent / Complainant.

 

2. Tafe Access Limited,

And its Branch Manager,

Race Course,

Coimbatore.                                                           .. 2^nd Respondent / 2^nd Opposite party.

 

Counsel for Appellant / 1^st Opposite party            : M/s. K.S. Ramakrishnan

Counsel for 1^st Respondent / Complainant           : M/s. G. Balasubramanian

Counsel for 2^nd Respondent / 2^nd Opposite party : M/s. C. Thomas

 

          This appeal coming up before us on 30.03.2022 for appearance of the appellant and 2^nd respondent and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                                                                

Docket Order

 

No representation for appellant.  Respondents 1 & 2 present.  This appeal is posted today for appearance of the appellant and 2^nd respondent 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 12.00 Noon 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/-                                            Sd/-

R. VENKATESAPERUMAL                S. KARUPPIAH                               R.SUBBIAH

            MEMBER                             JUDICIAL MEMBER                           PRESIDENT