Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

FA/111/2013

S. GANESH AND V. JOTHI RUKMANI - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

T.R. SETHURAMAN

24 Sep 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI – 600 003.

BEFORE         Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                            PRESIDENT

                         Tmt. Dr. S. M. LATHA MAHESWARI                           MEMBER

 

F.A. No.111/2013

                         DATED THE 24^TH  DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021

 

 

1. Mr. S. Ganesh,

S/o. Mr. T.R. Sethuraman,

 

2. Ms. V. Jyothi Rukmani,

W/o. Mr. S. Ganesh,

Both residing at:-

Apartment No.7, DABC Flats,

No.6, M.T.H. Road,

Chennai – 600 049.                                                             .. Appellants/ Complainants.

-Versus-

1. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Having its Registered Office at:-

Zenith House, Keshav Rao,

Khadge Maargh,

(Opp. to Mahalakshmi Race Course),

Mumbai – 34.

 

2. The TTK Health Care Service Pvt. Ltd.,

Having office at:-

Anmol Palani (2^nd Floor),

No.88, G.N. Chetty Road,

Chennai – 600 017.                                                      .. Respondents/ Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the Appellants          : M/s. T.R. Sethuraman

Counsel for the 1^st Respondent   : M/s. Glveera Ravindran

2^nd Respondent                           : FN served called absent

 

          This appeal coming up before us on 24.09.2021 for appearance of the appellants and for arguments and this Commission made the following order in open court:                                                                                                

 

 

Docket order

 

            No representation for appellant in person.  Respondents present.  This appeal is posted today for the appearance of appellant and for arguments.   When the matter was called at 10.30 A.M., the appellant in person not present hence, passed over and called again at 12.15 P.M.  then also, there is no representation for appellant in person.  Though it is specifically posted in the list today for arguments, the appellant in person remained absent.   Hence, keeping the appeal pending is of no use as appellant is not interested in prosecuting the case.

            Hence, the appeal is dismissed for default.  No order as to cost.

 

               

                   Sd/-                                                                                        Sd/-                                                                        

S.M.LATHAMAHESWARI                                                                            R.SUBBIAH                        

           MEMBER                                                                                           PRESIDENT