Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/120/2016

M/s. Jeayam Shelters (P) Ltd., Chairman - Complainant(s)

Versus

S. Manoj - Opp.Party(s)

R. Ponnusamy

28 Apr 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

 

F.A. No.120/2016

 

(Against the Order dt.23.03.2016 made in C.C. No.210/2011 on the file of

D.C.D.R.C., Chennai (North))

DATED THE 28^TH DAY OF APRIL 2022

 

 

M/s. Jeayam Shelters (P) Ltd.,

Represented by its Chairman,

Mr. B. Sampath Kumar,

No.244, MTH Road,

Villivakkam,

Chennai – 600 049.                                                                                                                   .. Appellant / Opposite party.

 

-Versus-

 

Mr. S. Manoj,

S/o. R. Surendar,

Represented by his Power of Attorney,

Smt. S. Nirmala,

W/o. R. Surendar,

No.99, 4^th Cross,

South Jaganatha Nagar,

Chennai – 600 049.                                                                                                                .. Respondent / Complainant.

 

Counsel for Appellant / Opposite party      : M/s. Ponnusamy

Counsel for Respondent / Complainant    : M/s. J. Ranjani Devi

 

          This appeal coming up before us on 28.04.2022 for appearance of appellant, for filing written argument of appellant and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                                                                

 

Docket Order

 

No representation for appellant.  Respondent present.   Respondent ready.  There was no representation for appellant for the past several hearings.

 This appeal is posted today for appearance of appellant, for filing written argument of appellant and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal. 

When the matter was called at 10.30 A.M., the Appellant was not present.  Hence, passed over and called again at 12.30 P.M. still, there is no representation for the appellant.  Hence, we are of the view that keeping the appeal pending is of no use as the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the case.

Hence, the appeal is dismissed for default.    No order as to costs.

 

 

               

               Sd/-                                                                                                                       Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                                    R.SUBBIAH                        

             MEMBER                                                                                                      PRESIDENT