Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/236/2015

R. Yogeswaran - Complainant(s)

Versus

Saraswathi - Opp.Party(s)

K. Murugan

16 Nov 2021

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI – 600 003.

BEFORE         Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                            PRESIDENT

                         Tmt. Dr. S. M. LATHA MAHESWARI                           MEMBER

 

F.A. No.236/2015

(Against the order in C.C. No.42/2012, dated:04.06.2015 on the file of

D.C.D.R.C., Namakkal)

                         DATED THE 16^th  DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

 

 

R.Yogeswaran

Raj Cable

24-E, Omsakthi Illam,

Ashok Nagar – 1^st Street,

Thirunagar, Mohanur Road,

Namakkal-637 002.                                                         .. Appellant / 1^st Opposite party

 

-Vs-

 1.Saraswathi, W/o.Loganathan

   No.1, Arthanari Palli Street

   Sandaipettai puthur,

   Namakkal – 637 002.

 

2.Tamilnadu Payaneetaalar Sangam

   Rep. by its Present Secretary

   Ka.Subbarayan                                                          ..Respondent / Complainant

 

3.M.Madheswari,

   Assistant Manager, (Cable TV)

   Tamilnadu Govt. Cable TV Corporn. Ltd.,

   12. D.2, Karuppannan Street,

   Paramathi Salai, Namakkal-637 002.                     ..3^rd Respondent/ 2^nd Opposite party     

 

Counsel for the Appellants            : M/s. K.Murugan

Counsel for the 1^st Respondent    : M/s. Profex Association

Counsel for 2^nd Respondent         : Served called absent

 

          This appeal coming up before us on 16.11.2021 and this , this Commission made the following order:                                                                                                

 

 

 

Docket order

 

            No representation for appellant. 1^st Respondent present. This appeal is posted today for appearance of 1^st Respondent & for filing written argument of appellant & 1^st Respondent & for  arguments in list. When the matter was called at 10.30 a.m the appellant was not present hence, passed over and called again at 12.15 pm, then also the appellant has not appeared and the written arguments were not filed. Hence keeping the appeal pending is of no ouse as parties are not interested in prosecuting the case.

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

 

 

                    Sd/-                                                                                      Sd/-                                                                        

S.M.LATHAMAHESWARI                                                                           R.SUBBIAH                        

          MEMBER                                                                                           PRESIDENT