Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/66/2013

A.J. SEETHA - Complainant(s)

Versus

LAND MARVEL HOMES, MANAGING PARTNER - Opp.Party(s)

BHARATHI

30 Jun 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

 

C.C. No.66/2013

DATED THE 30^TH DAY OF JUNE 2022

 

1. Mrs. A.J. Seetha,

W/o. Mr. S. Kumara Velayutham,

No.250, Mouliswarar Nagar,

Mangadu Road,

Moulivakkam,

Chennai – 600 125.   

 

2. Mr. S. Kumara Velayutham,

S/o. Mr. V. Subramanian,

No.250, Mouliswarar Nagar,

Mangadu Road,

Moulivakkam,

Chennai – 600 125.                                                                                .. Complainants.

                                                       - Versus –

 

Land Marvel Homes,

Represented by its Managing Partner

Mr. M. Veerashekar,

S/o. Late V.R. Muthuraman,

No.9, 1^st Cross Street,

Kasturba Nagar,

Adyar,

Chennai – 600 020.                                                                                .. Opposite party.

 

Counsel for the complainants              : M/s. S. Bharathi

Counsel for the opposite party            : M/s. K. Kumaran

 

This consumer complaint coming up before us on 30.06.2022 for appearance of the complainants, for filing written argument of the opposite party and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                      

 

Docket Order

 

No representation for the complainants. Opposite party present.   There was no representation for the complainants continuously for the past several hearings.

Today, this matter is posted for appearance of the complainants, for filing written argument of opposite party and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal.  

When the matter was called at 10.30 A.M. there was no representation for the complainants.  Hence, the matter was passed over and again called at 12.30 P.M. still, there was no representation for the complainants.  Hence, we are of the view that keeping the consumer complaint pending is of no use as the complainants are not interested in prosecuting the case.

Hence, the consumer complaint is dismissed for default.   No cost.

 

 

               Sd/-                                                                                                             Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                         R.SUBBIAH                        

             MEMBER                                                                                         PRESIDENT