Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

FA/121/2014

K.P.Natarajan,Managing Director ,K.P.N. Travels Ltd., - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.National Insurance Co. Ltd.,Divisional Office 2 - Opp.Party(s)

V. BALAJI

24 Apr 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

                       BEFORE    Hon’ble THIRU. JUSTICE  R. SUBBIAH           ::      PRESIDENT                       

                                          Thiru.R.VENKATESA PERUMAL                     ::      MEMBER

 

 CC. No. 121/2014

                                                              DATED THIS THE 29^th  DAY OF JUNE 2022

 

Mr. Mohammed Nizam Mohammed Ibrahim Ali,

Proprietor, SPARX SYSTEMS INDIA,

Having its registered office

At No.36/A, W-Block

Anna Nagar,

Chennai – 600 040                                              ..complainant  

 

                                          Vs

 

1.The Manager

Air Asia Sales Office,

123/124, Ispahani Centre,

Nungambakkam High Road,

Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034 

 

2. The Manager,

Air Asia Berhad,

LCC Terminal,

Jalan KLIA S3, Southern Support Zone,

Kuala Lumpur International Airport – 64000 Sepang,

Selangor Darul Eshan,

Malaysia.                                              ..opposite parties

 

Counsel for the complainant                           : M/s A.S.Mujibur Rehaman

1^st opposite party                                          : Exparte

Counsel for the 2^nd opposite party                   : M/s P.R.Raman

 

          This complaint is coming on before us for hearing today, this commission made the following order in open court :-

 

                                                                                 Docket order

 

          No representation for complainant. 2^nd opposite party present. 1^st opposite party served called absent set exparte. This complaint is posted today for appearance of complainant and 2^nd opposite party and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal. when the matter was called at 11.00 A.M, the complainant was not present hence passed over and called again at 12.45 noon, then also the complainant has not appeared. Hence we are of the view that keeping the complaint pending is of no use as the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the case. The complaint is dismissed for default. No order as to cost.

Sd/-                                                                                                             Sd/-

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                 R.SUBBIAH

MEMBER                                                                                                PRESIDENT