Filed On: 22.06.2011

Disposed:02.07.2015

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, THIRUVALLUR

PRESENT . THIRU. S. PANDIAN, B.Sc., L.L.M                                          :   PRESIDENT

                    TMT.    S.  SUJATHA, B.SC.,                                                     :   MEMBER-I

THIRU. V.  VENKATESAN, M.A.B.Ed., MBA. M.PHIL.B.L.,                    :   MEMBER-II

Tuesday, the Day of 21^st July - 2015

c.c. No. 18 / 2013

K. Mohan

S/o. K. Kothandapani

No. 12/124, Seniamman Koil 2^nd Street,

Tondiarpet, Near Tondiarpet Depot.,

Chennai – 600 081.                                                               ...Complainant

-Vs-

1. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd.,

    Interface Building, No. 11, 401 / 402,

    4^th Floor, New Link Road,

    Malad (W), Mumbai – 400 064.

2. ICICI Bank  Credit Card Operation

    P.O. Box. 7981, Tulasiwadi P.O, Mumbai -  400 034.

3. ICICI Bank Limited

    Regional Office: Plot No. 24,

    Arihant Bu South Phase, Block No. 1,

    1^st Floor, Ambattur, Industrial Estate

    Chennai – 600 058.

4. Mr. Shiva Kumar

    Tadikonda, Nodal Officer

    ICICI Bank Limited, ICICI Banking Center

    ICICI Bank Tower, 7^th Floor, Survey No. 115 / 27

    Plot No. 12, Nanakramguda, Serilangampally

    Hyderabad – 500 032.                                                          ...Opposite Parties

Counsel For Complainant                          :Mr. S.P.S. Buddhan & D. Hari,

                                                                         Advocate

Counsel For Opposite party-I                    : Exparte

Counsel For Opposite Parties-3 Adopted 2&4  : Mrs. A. Lathamaheswari,

                                                                              Advocate

ORDER

          Proof Affidavit of the Complainant is not filed even posted today as, “No Further Adjournment”.   Complainant is called absent.  It is noted from the adjudication that it is the pending for filing of the proof affidavit from 27.07.2015 i.e., for more than 18 months.  Further, it is pertinent to note that the complainants is continuously absent for the past hearings and no other representation on the side of the complainant.  In spite of sufficient time given, the complainant has not chosen to file his proof affidavit as his evidence in order to prove the allegation made in the complaint against the opposite parties.  It clearly reveals the fact of his disinterest in the progress of this case.   Therefore, there is no justification to prolong further without any progress. 

          Hence, this complaint is  Dismissed for Default.  No costs.

Sd/-***                                     Sd/-***                                         Sd/-***

MEMBER – I                      MEMBER – II                                      PRESIDENT