Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

FA/316/2014

INDIAN BANK, BRANCH MANAGER - Complainant(s)

Versus

K. GOVINDAN - Opp.Party(s)

Murthi & Vasan -Applt

26 Nov 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.316 / 2014

(Against the order in C.C. No.04/2012, dated:07.03.2014 on the file of

D.C.D.R.C., Villupuram)

                         DATED THE 26^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

 

 

1. The Branch Manager,

Indian Bank,

Kandachipuram,

Thirukovilur Taluk.

 

2. The Zonal Manager,

Indian Bank,

Zonal Office,

Commercial Division,

Puducherry – 605 001.

 

3. The General Manager,

Indian Bank,

No.66, Rajaji Salai,

Chennai – 1.                                                                                                                 .. Appellants/ Opposite parties

-Versus-

1. K. Govindan,

S/o. Mr. Kuppusamy,

North Street,

Veerangipuram,

Thirukovilur Taluk,

Villupuram District.

 

2. K. Govindan’s Authorised Agent,

Mr. N.E. Suvitha Ganesan,

President,

Thirukovilur Taluk Consumer Protection Sangam,

Thirukovilur Taluk,

Villupuram District.                                                                                                           .. Respondents/Complainants.

Appellant / Complainant           : Party in person

Respondents 1 & 2                  : Served called absent

 

          This appeal coming up before us on 26.11.2021 for appearance of appellant, for filing of written arguments of 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. This appeal is posted today for appearance of Appellant and for filing written arguments 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 12.00 Noon, then also, the Appellant has not appeared.  Hence keeping the appeal  pending is of no use as parties are not interested in prosecuting the case.

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

 

               

                   Sd/-                                                                                                                   Sd/-                                                                        

S.M.LATHAMAHESWARI                                                                                     R.SUBBIAH                        

           MEMBER                                                                                                      PRESIDENT