Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/252/2015

Sudhir N.Shenoy, S/o.H.Nagesh Shenoy - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Marg Properties Ltd, Rep by its Chairman and Managing Director, and anr - Opp.Party(s)

R. Ramana

26 Aug 2020

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/252/2015
( Date of Filing : 05 Nov 2015 )
 
1. Sudhir N.Shenoy, S/o.H.Nagesh Shenoy
Old No.1, New No.1, 2nd Floor, 6th Main Road, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai-600028
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/s.Marg Properties Ltd, Rep by its Chairman and Managing Director, and anr
4/318, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Kottivakkam, Chennai-600041.
2. The Managing Director, M/s. MARG Properties Ltd,
Marg Axis,4/318, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Kottivakkam, Chennai-600041.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. S. TAMILVANAN PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. K BASKARAN JUDICIAL MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. TMT.Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESHWARI MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 26 Aug 2020
Final Order / Judgement

BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

BEFORE        Hon’ble Thiru.Dr. Justice S.TAMILVANAN           PRESIDENT

                        Thiru.K.BASKARAN                                             JUDICIAL  MEMBER

                        Tmt.Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI                         MEMBER

CC.No.252/2015

                                                                      DATED THE 26th  DAY OF AUGUST  2020

Sudhir N. Shenoy,

S/o. H.Nagesh Shenoy,

Old No.1, New No.1, 2nd Floor,

6th Main Road, Raja Annamalai Puram,

Chennai – 600 028.                                             .. Complainant

Vs.

 

  1. M/s. MARG Properties Ltd.,

          Rep. by its Managing Director,

          Marg Axis,

         4/318, Rajiv Gandhi Salai,

         Kottivakkam, Chennai – 600 041.

  1. The Managing Director,

          M/s. MARG Properties Ltd.,

          Marg Axis,

         4/318, Rajiv Gandhi Salai,

         Kottivakkam, Chennai – 600 041...Opposite parties

Counsel for Complainant                       : M/s. Ralph. V.Manohar

For opposite parties 1 & 2                    :  M/s.B.R.Shankaralingam

DOCKET ORDER

           Memo filed by the complainant praying for withdrawal of complaint after giving notice to opposite parties.

          Memo Recorded.

          In view of the memo filed by the complainant, the complainant is permitted to withdraw the complaint. Accordingly,

          The complaint is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to cost.

 

     Sd/-                                                                  Sd/-                                                          Sd/-

S.M.LATHAMAHESWARI                        K.BASKARAN                                   S.TAMILVANAN    

MEMBER                                                 JUDICIAL MEMBER                               PRESIDENT

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. S. TAMILVANAN]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. K BASKARAN]
JUDICIAL MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. TMT.Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESHWARI]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.