Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/384/2022

Executive Engineer Administrative Officer Salem Housing Unit Tamil Nadu Housing Board Salem 8 - Complainant(s)

Versus

C.Ramanathan Kandampatty West NHS Colony Salem 5 - Opp.Party(s)

D.Murugan

30 Nov 2023

ORDER

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

BEFORE          Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                           PRESIDENT

 

F.A. No.384/2022

 

(Against the Order dt.14.07.2022 made in M.A. No.40/2022 in E.A. No.15/2016 in C.C. No.109/2010 on the file of D.C.D.R.C., Salem)

DATED THE 30^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023

 

The Executive Engineer /

Administrative Officer,

Salem Housing Unit,

Tamil Nadu Housing Board,

Iayyanthirumaligai,

Salem – 8.                          .. Appellant / Respondent / Respondent / Opposite party.

 

-Versus-

 

Mr. C. Ramanathan,

S/o. Mr. Chinnappa Gounder,

No.A-21, Kandampatty,

West NHS Colony,

Salem – 5.                               ..  Respondent / Petitioner / Petitioner / Complainant.

 

Counsel for Appellant / Respondent / Respondent /

Opposite party                                                         : M/s. D. Murugan

Counsel for Respondent / Petitioner / Petitioner /

Complainant                                                            : M/s. V. Sekar

 

                This appeal coming up before me on 30.11.2023 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 both parties.

This appeal is posted today for appearance of the 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 it 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, this appeal is dismissed for default.    No costs.

               

                                                                                                                      Sd/-                                                                        

                                                                           R.SUBBIAH                        

                                                                                                               PRESIDENT