Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/158/2015

C. Raja - Complainant(s)

Versus

K.S. Anvar - Opp.Party(s)

28 Feb 2022

ORDER

 IN THE TAMIL NADU 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.158/2015

(Against the Order dt.13.08.2014 made in C.C. No.23/2014 on the file of

D.C.D.R.C., Erode)

                         DATED THE 28^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

 

 

Mr. C. Raja,

S/o. Mr. Chinnasamy,

Door No.212, First Floor,

Selley Tower,

Veerappan Chathiram,

Erode District – 638 004.                                                       .. Appellant / Complainant.

-Versus-

 

1. Mr. K.S. Anwar,

Chief Managing Director,

Alliance Expert Courier,

Door No.160, Lingi Chetty Street,

Opp. to Madras High Court,

Chennai – 600 001.    

 

Now residing at:-

Non-stop Couriers & Cargo,

K.S. Anwar, No.43, Kuruvikaran Street,

Near Arvind Eye Hospital,

Anna Nagar,

Madurai – 20.

 

2. Mrs. Swetha @ Roopavarthini,

Manager,

Alliance Expert Courier,

Door No.160, Lingi Chetty Street,

Opp. to Madras High Court,

Chennai – 600 001.                                                .. Respondents / Opposite parties.

 

 Appellant / Complainant                                      : Party in person

Respondents / Opposite parties                          : Paper Publication effected

 

          This appeal coming up before us on 28.02.2022 for appearance 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 appellant in person.  This appeal is posted today for appearance 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 01.15 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 appellant is 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