Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/112/2016

The First Flight Courier Ltd., Rep. by its Manager & 2 Ors. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. G.V. Audio Vision Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Manager, Murugasen - Opp.Party(s)

S.Mekhala

14 Dec 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.112 / 2016

(Against the order in C.C. No.28/2014, dated:22.04.2016 on the file of

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

                         DATED THE 14^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

 

 

1. The First Flight Courier Limited,

Represented by its Manager,

No.19/2Ab, 1^st Floor NSS Building,

Opposite to Raja Thirumana Mahal,

Salem – 636 004.

 

2. The First Flight Courier Limited,

Represented by its Manager,

No.3/23, Kongu Nagar,

Karungalpalayam,

Erode – 638 003.

 

3. The First Flight Courier Limited,

Represented by its Manager,

No.15/16, National House,

Sakthi Vihar Road,

Chandivali Junction,

Andheri,

Mumbai – 400 072.                                                         .. Appellants / Opposite parties.

-Versus-

M/s. G.V. Audio Vision Private Limited,

Represented by its Manager

Mr. Murugasen,

H.O.: D. No.21 B, Mettur Road,

Erode – 638 011.                                                           .. Respondent  / Complainant.

 

 

Counsel for the Appellants / Opposite parties : M/s. S. Mekala

Counsel for the Respondent  / Complainant   : M/s. K. S. Jeyaganeshan

 

          This appeal coming up before us on 14.12.2021 for appearance of both, for written arguments of both and for arguments (in list) and this Commission made the following order in open court:                                                                                                

 

Docket order

 

Respondent present. No representation for appellants. This appeal is posted today for appearance of both, for filing written argument of both and for arguments (in list).  When the matter was called at 11.30 A.M., the Appellant was not present hence, passed over and called again at 12.45 P.M., then also, the Appellant has not appeared.  Hence keeping the appeal  pending is of no use as the 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