Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/99/2018

Raja Muthiah, S/o. Muthiah - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Sare Realty Projects, Pvt Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

M/s. K. Ramesh

23 Jan 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.99/2018

DATED THE 23^RD DAY OF JANUARY 2023

 

1. Raja Muthiah,

S/o. Mr. Muthiah,

No.F1-A, Gangai Street,

2^nd Main Road, Thiruthani Nagar,

Zamin Pallavaram,

Chennai  600 117.       

 

2. Mrs. Priyanka Rethinam,

W/o. Mr. Raja Muthiah,

No.F1-A, Gangai Street,

2^nd Main Road, Thiruthani Nagar,

Zamin Pallavaram,

Chennai  600 117.                                                                              .. Complainants.                                                   

Versus 

M/s. Sare Realty Projects Pvt. Ltd.,

Represented by its Director,

SKCL ICON,

Thiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate,

Guindy,

Chennai.                                                                                             .. Opposite party.

 

Counsel for the complainants                    : M/s. R. Ramesh

Counsel for the opposite party                  : M/s. R. Dhanalakshmi

 

This consumer complaint coming up before us on 23.01.2023 for appearance of the complainant and for taking steps to implead the Interim Resolution Professional or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                     

 

 

Docket Order

 

Opposite party present.  No representation for the complainants.  This matter is posted for several hearings for taking steps to implead the Interim Resolution Professional by the complainants.  

Today, this matter is posted for appearance of complainants and for taking steps to implead the Interim Resolution Professional 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 01.00 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 costs.

 

 

 

               Sd/-                                                                                         Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                          R.SUBBIAH                        

             MEMBER