Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/265/2017

R.Kiran Agarwal alias Kiran Kumar Agarwal, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director,M/s,DSC Motors Pvt.Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

K.Venkatakrishnan

25 Oct 2021

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI – 600 003.

                   BEFORE         Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                            PRESIDENT

                                           Tmt. Dr. S. M. LATHA MAHESWARI                           MEMBER

 

C.C. No.265/2017

                                                           DATED THE 25^TH  DAY OF OCTOBER  2021

 

R. Kiran Agarwal alias Kiran Kumar Agarwal,

Son of Thiru. Radesh Shym Agarwal

No. 15, Kasthuri Rangan Road 1^st  Street,

Alwarpet,

Chennai – 600 015.

                                                                                                     .. Complainant.

 

-Versus-

1. M/s. Managing Director

    DSC Motors Pvt. Ltd.,

    No.10-26, Anna Salai

    Little Mount

    Chennai – 600 015.

 

2. The Chief Executive Officer

    Hyundai Motors India Limited

    NP-54, T.V.K. Industrial Estate

    Ekkathungal, Guindy,

    Chennai – 600 032.

                                                                                                         .. Opposite Parties.

 

 Counsel for the complainant                    : M/s. K. Venkata Krishnan

 Counsel for the opposite party 1              : M/s. Suchit Anant Palande

 Counsel for the opposite party 2              : M/s. M.B. Gopalan Asso

 

          This consumer complaint coming up before us on 25.10.2021 for hearing. Due to non-representation of the complainant, this Commission made the following order:-

                                                                 Docket order

            No representation for complainant and 1^st opposite party. 2^nd op present. Today this matter is posted for filing written arguments of both and for arguments (list). When this matter was called at 11.00 a.m, there was no representation for complainant, hence the matter was passed over and again called at 12.45 noon, the complainant was again not present. Written arguments also not filed. Since the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the case, the complaint is dismissed for default.  No cost.

 

 

                   Sd/-                                                                                                     Sd/-                                                                        

S.M.LATHAMAHESWARI                                                                           R.SUBBIAH                        

          MEMBER                                                                                                PRESIDENT