Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/88/2017

M/s.Pacific Granites (India) Pvt Ltd, Rep by its Director - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Bharathi Axa General Insurance Company Ltd, Rep by its Branch Manager - Opp.Party(s)

T.Pramodkumar Chopda-Complt

28 Nov 2022

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.88/2017

DATED THE 28^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

M/s. Pacific Granites (India) Pvt. Limited,

Represented by its Director,

Mr. Mohanlal Somani,

Survey No.293/2, Nallaganakothapalli Village,

Konerupalli Union,

Shoolagiri Block,

Krishnagiri District,

Hosur – 635 117.                                                                                 .. Complainant.                                                   

- Versus –

 

1. M/s. Bharati AXA General Insurance Company Limited,

Represented by its Branch Manager,

1^st Floor, Ferns Icon, Survey No.28,

Doddanekundi,

Bangalore – 560 037.

 

2. M/s. Vetrivel Transport,

Represented by its Branch Manager,

(Transport Contractors & Commission Agent),

Old No.249, New No.166, 2^nd Floor,

Thambu Chetty Street,

Mannady,

Chennai  - 600 001.                                                                          .. Opposite parties.

 

 

Counsel for the complainant              : M/s. T. Pramodkumar

Counsel for the 1^st opposite party      : M/s. R. Rathna Thara

2^nd Opposite party                              : Exparte

 

This consumer complaint coming up before us on 28.11.2022 for appearance of the complainant and for appropriate orders or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                      

 

Docket Order

 

No representation for both parties. There was no representation for the complainant continuously for several hearings. 

Today, this matter is posted for appearance of complainant and for appropriate 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, the consumer complaint is dismissed for default.   No costs.

 

 

               Sd/-                                                                                                          Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                         R.SUBBIAH                        

             MEMBER                                                                                         PRESIDENT