Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

FA/302/2014

BARANI HOSPITAL, THE SPECIALTIES HEALTH CARE - Complainant(s)

Versus

A.K. BALAKRISHNAN - Opp.Party(s)

VEERASEKARAN

28 Sep 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.302/2014

 

(Against the Order dt.30.05.2014 made in C.C. No.662/2005 on the file of

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

 

DATED THE 28^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022

 

The Specialties Health Care,

C/o. Barani Hospital,

Represented by its Administrative Officer,

No.22, Arcot Road,

Saligramam,

Chennai.                                                                     .. Appellant / 2^nd Opposite party.

-Versus-

1. A.K. Balakrishnan,

No.11/18, Rasram Plaza,

Virugambakkam,

Kamarajar Salai,

Chennai – 600 092.                                                        .. 1^st Respondent / Complainant.

 

2. Dr. S. Venkatesh,

Venkatesh Eye Clinic,

Flat-C, No.110, Gangai Apartments,

Virugambakkam,

Kamarajar Salai,

Chennai – 600 092.

 

3. Intra Ocular Care Pvt. Ltd.,

Semi Compound “C” Block,

No.52, U.R. Nagar,

Padi,

Chennai – 600 050.                                  .. Respondents 2 & 3 / Opposite parties 1 & 3.

 

Counsel for Appellant / 2^nd Opposite party   : M/s. D. Veerasekaran

Counsel for 1^st Respondent / Complainant   : M/s. S. Elambharathi

Respondents 2 & 3 / Opposite parties 1 & 3 : Paper publication effected called absent

          This appeal coming up before us on 28.09.2022 for appearance of both and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                                                                

Docket Order

 

No representation for both parties.  

There was no representation for the appellant continuously for the hearings from 29.11.2021.  Hence, notice dt.16.08.2022 was sent to the appellant and his Counsel through this Commission.  Though the notice was served to the appellant as well as to his Counsel, the appellant has neither chosen to appear nor to represent through his Advocate before this Commission.

This appeal is posted today for appearance of both 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 12.30 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