Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/259/2017

Mrs. Umamaheshwari, - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s,HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company&others - Opp.Party(s)

S.Martin Advocates

07 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.259/2017

DATED THE 07^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023

Mrs. Umamaheshwari,

W/o. Late M. Kannan,

No.375-A, New Street,

Ganeshapuram,

Namakkal,

Namakkal District.                                                                             .. Complainant.                                                   

 

- Versus –

1. M/s. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited,

Represented by its Authorised Signatory,

The IL & FS Financial Centre,

5^th Floor, Plot No.C-22, G-Block,

Bandra-Kurla Complex,

Bandra (E),

Mumbai – 400 051.

 

2. M/s. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited,

Represented by its Authorised Signatory,

Salem Main Road, No.595-B,

1^st Floor, PSK Complex,

Namakkal – 637 001.

Namakkal District.                                                                           .. Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant                        : M/s. S. Martin

Counsel for the Opposite parties 1 & 2        : M/s. P.D. Selvaraj

 

This consumer complaint coming up before us on 07.06.2023 for appearance of both parties, for filing written arguments of both parties and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                      

Docket Order

 

No representation for both parties.

Today, this matter is posted for appearance of both parties, for filing written arguments of both parties and for  arguments (in list) 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 12.30 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