Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/308/2014

Smt. Tatisetti Chandrika - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

R.S.S. Swarup

31 Mar 2015

ORDER

                                                             Registration of the Complaint:26-09-2014     

   Date of Order:31-03-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II

AT VISAKHAPATNAM

                  

Present:

1.Sri H.ANANDHA RAO, M.A., L.L.B.,

       President

2.Sri C.V.RAO, M.A., B.L.,

                                             Male Member

3.Smt.K.SAROJA, M.A., B.L.,

       Lady Member

 

TUESDAY, THE 31^ST OF MARCH, 2015

C.C.No.308/2014

 

BETWEEN:

 

SMT.TATISETTI CHANDRIKA W/O LATE T.SHANMUKARAO,

HINDU, AGED 22 YEARS, R/O 1-45, VELLANKI VILLAGE,

ANANDAPURAM MANDALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

                 …COMPLAINANT

AND:

1.SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, SITUATED AT PLOT NO.7-1,

NH5 ROAD, NEAR REGISTRAR OFFICE, MADHURAWADA,

VISAKHAPATNAM.

2. SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, MVP DOUBLE ROAD,

D.NO.1-83-27/1, MIG 53  SECTOR 5, M.V.P. COLONY,

VISAKHAPATNAM.

3. SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SITUATED AT 123

ANGAPPA NAIKAN STREET, CHENNAI.

4. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSRUANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SITUATED AT E-8,

EPIP SEETHAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA, JAIPUR,

RAJASTHAN.

                                                                                             …OPPOSITE PARTIES

          This case coming on 19-03-2015 for Counter of OP before us in the presence of           Sri R.S.S.SWARUP, Advocate for the Complainant, and of Sri P.V.NARAYANA RAO, Advocate for the 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd Opposite Parties and of Sri V.PARDHASARADHI, Advocate for the 4^th Opposite Party, and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following.

 

DOCKET ORDER

(As per the Orders of the Hon’ble President on behalf of the Bench)

 

The Complainant filed Memo stating that she is not pressing the complaint as she has no interest in pursuing the case after issuing notice to OP. Heard both sides, Memo is recorded. Complaint is dismissed as not pressed without costs.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, on this the 31^st day of March, 2015.

 

  Sd/-                                         Sd/-                                                  Sd/-

M.MEMBER                                L.MEMBER                                     PRESIDENT