Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/174/2017

Amal John - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Hallmark Living Spaces (P) Ltd., Rep by its Director A.Arthi - Opp.Party(s)

S.Suresh Kumar-Compt.,

28 Jun 2023

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.174/2017

DATED THE 28^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023

Mr. Amal John,

S/o. Mr. K.M. John,

Kariankal House,

Near Govt. Hospital Junction,

Priavom-Elanji Road,

Piravom, Ernakulam (Dist.),

Kerala – 686 664.                                                                             .. Complainant.                                                   

- Versus –

1. M/s. Hallmark Living Spaces Pvt. Ltd.,

Represented by its Director,

M/s. A. Arthi,

Suite A, No.43, Old No.62/2,

United Plaza Usman Road,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017. 

 

2. Mr. S. Dhanapal,

Official Liquidator,

Suite No.103, First Floor,

Kaveri Complex,

No.96/104, Nungambakkam High Road,

Chennai – 600 034.                                                                         .. Opposite party.

 

(Amendment carried out as per the order dt.25.07.2022 of this Commission

 in MP No.95/2022 in C.C. No.174/2017)

 

Counsel for the Complainant            : M/s. S. Suresh Kumar

Counsel for the 1^st Opposite party    : M/s. R. Parthasarathy

Counsel for the 2^nd Opposite party   : M/s. A.M. Elango

This consumer complaint coming up before us on 28.06.2023 for appearance of the complainant and 2^nd opposite party and for filing proof affidavit of the 1^st opposite party and for appropriate order regarding NCLT Orders or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                      

 

Docket Order

 

1^st Opposite party present and ready for arguments. No representation for the complainant and 2^nd Opposite party.

Today, this matter is posted for appearance of the complainant and 2^nd opposite party, for filing proof affidavit of the 1^st opposite party for appropriate order regarding NCLT Orders or for dismissal.  

When the matter was called at 10.30 A.M., there was no representation for the complainant.  Hence, the matter was passed over and again called at 01.00 P.M., still, there was no representation for the complainant.  Hence, we are of the view that keeping the consumer complaint pending is of no use as the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the case.

Hence, this consumer complaint is dismissed for default.   No costs.

 

 

 

               Sd/-                                                                                                  Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                         R.SUBBIAH                        

             MEMBER                                                                                       PRESIDENT