Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/3/2023

The Manager, Canara Bank & Anr. - Complainant(s)

Versus

T.S.Palanisamy, S/o Nanjappa Gounder - Opp.Party(s)

M/s Gopalan &Co

30 Mar 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

 

F.A. No.03/2023

 

(Against the Order dt.24.06.2022 made in C.C. No.07/2020 on the file of

D.C.D.R.C., Erode)

DATED THE 30^TH DAY OF MARCH 2023

 

1. The Manager,

Canara Bank,

Arthanari Mudaliyar Illam,

Semmuniswamy Kovil Road,

Vellithituppur,

Anthiyur Taluk,

Erode – 638 314.  

 

2. The Canara Bank,

Represented by its General Manager,

Head Office:

No.112, J.C. Road,

Bangalore – 560 002.                                                  .. Appellants/ Opposite parties.

 

-Versus-

T.N. Palanisamy,

S/o. Nanjappa Gounder,

No.18, 122 A, Devasathana Kattur,

Vellithiruppur Village,

Anthiyur Taluk,

Erode District – 638 314.                                                .. Respondent / Complainant.

 

Counsel for Appellants/ Opposite parties         : M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co.

Counsel for Respondent / Complainant           : M/s. D. Selvaraju

                 

This appeal coming up before us on 30.03.2023 for appearance of the appellant and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:        

                                                                                                                                                                               

 

Docket Order

 

Respondent present and ready for arguments. No representation for the appellant.  

This appeal is posted today for appearance of the 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 01.00 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, this appeal is dismissed for default.    No order as to costs.

 

 

               

                Sd/-                                                                                              Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                        R.SUBBIAH                       

             MEMBER                                                                                     PRESIDENT