Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/107/2017

Apparajan Ganesan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Bank of India, Mount road branch - Opp.Party(s)

Surana and Surana

18 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

 

C.C. No.107/2017

DATED THE 18^TH  DAY OF APRIL 2022

 

 

Mr. Apparajan Ganesan,

9005 S FM 973,

Austin,

TX 78719, United States of America,

Represented through his Power Agent

Mr. G. Pratik,

New No.17, Old No.12, East Mada Street,

Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 004.                                                                                                                                       .. Complainant.

-Versus-

1. The Branch Manager,

Bank of India,

Mount Road Branch,

No.827, Anna Salai,

P.O. No.2703,

Chennai – 600 002.

 

2. The Chief Manager,

Bank of India,

Corporate Services Department,

Zonal Office – Chennai Zone,

‘Star House’,

No.30 (Old No.17), Errabalu Street,

Chennai – 600 001.

 

3. The Deputy General Manager,

Bank of India,

Corporate Services Department,

Zonal Office – Chennai Zone,

‘Star House’,

No.30 (Old No.17), Errabalu Street,

Chennai – 600 001.

4. The Assistant General Manager,

 Bank of India,

Customer Excellence Branch Banking Department,

Head Office,

‘Star House’, C-5, G-Block,

3^rd Floor, East Wing,

Bandra – Kurla Complex,

Mumbai – 400 051.                                                                                                                                        .. Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant                  : M/s. Surana & Surana

Counsel for the opposite parties 1 to 4  : M/s. J.M. Dharma Sanjeevi

 

          This consumer complaint coming up before us on 18.04.2022 for appearance of the complainant, for filing written argument of complainant and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                      

Docket Order

 

No representation for the complainant.  Opposite parties 1 to 4 present.   Today, this matter is posted for appearance of the complainant, for filing written argument of complainant and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal.   When the matter was called at 10.30 A.M. there was no representation for complainant.  Hence, the matter was passed over and again called at 01.15 P.M. still there was no representation of the complainant.  Hence, we are of the view that keeping the consumer complaint pending is of no use as the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the case.

Hence, the consumer complaint is dismissed for default.   No cost.

 

               Sd/-                                                                                                                Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                               R.SUBBIAH                        

             MEMBER                                                                                               PRESIDENT