IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

                BEFORE        Hon’ble Dr. Justice S.TAMILVANAN           PRESIDENT

                                        Thiru.K.BASKARAN                         JUDICIAL  MEMBER

                                       Tmt.Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI                     MEMBER

 CC.No.315/2015

                                                                      DATED, THE 27^th DAY OF JUNE 2019

1.T.Krishna kumar

S/o Thangavel

House No 4-3,

Nangan Vilai,

Nettang Code,

Karankadu post,

Kanyakumari District,

Tamil Nadu State                                         ..complainant

                                             Vs

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu

Rep.by its Secretary

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,

Chennai, Tamil Nadu   

2. The Director of Medical and Rural Health Service,

No.258, DMS complex,

3^rd floor, Anna Salai,

Teynampet West,

Chennai 600 006

3. Dean

Kanyakumari Government Medical College

Hospital, Asaripallam,

Nagercoil,

Kanyakumari District

4. Dr.Albert,

Department of Orthopedics

Kanyakumari Government Medical College

Hospital, Asaripallam,

Nagercoil,

Kanyakumari District

5. Kanyakumari District Office,

Joint Director Health Service (JDHS)

Health Department

Nagercoil                                          ..1 to 5 opposite parties

Counsel for complainant                    : M/s A.Levis Senthilkumar

Counsel for opposite parties 1 to 3 &5 : M/s T.Ravikumar

Counsel for 4^th opposite party             : M/s Isaac Mohanlal

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

                                                  Docket order

          No representation for complainant. Opposite parties present. This complaint is posted today for appearance of complainant and for filing proof affidavit of complainant or for dismissal. Complainant is being continuously absent from September 2017. Today also there is no representation for the complainant. Proof affidavit and written arguments of complainant not filed. Sufficient time granted. Though the matter is called twice and passed over till 1.00 pm there is no representation for complainant. Complainant is also absent, thereby showing that the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the case. Therefore no useful purpose will be served in keeping the complaint on file. Hence the complaint is dismissed for default.

  Sd/-xxxx                                       Sd/-xxxx                                         Sd/-xxxx

S.M.LATHAMAHESWARI         K.BASKARAN                    S.TAMILVANAN

     MEMBER                       JUDICIAL MEMBER                      PRESIDENT