The Branch Manager M/s.Renauld India pvt Ltd V/S Dr.Lalith Narayanan
Dr.Lalith Narayanan filed a consumer case on 25 Oct 2017 against The Branch Manager M/s.Renauld India pvt Ltd in the North Chennai Consumer Court. The case no is cc/166/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 13 Nov 2017.
Tamil Nadu
North Chennai
cc/166/2016
Dr.Lalith Narayanan - Complainant(s)
Versus
The Branch Manager M/s.Renauld India pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)
S.Subbiah
25 Oct 2017
ORDER
Complaint presented on: 18.10.2016
Order pronounced on: 25.10.2017
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L., PRESIDENT
THIRU. M.UYIRROLI KANNAN B.B.A., B.L., MEMBER – I
WEDNESDAY THE 25th DAY OF OCTOBER 2017
C.C.NO.166/2016
Dr.Lalith Narayanan,
S/o.N.Valayapathi,
No.109, Mahaveer Street,
Sathya Nagar, Padi,
Chennai – 600 050.
..... Complainant
..Vs..
1.The Branch Manager,
M/s. Renault India Pvt. Ltd.,
4th Floor, A.S.V. Ramana Towers,
37 and 38, Venkatanarayana Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017.
2. The Branch Manager,
M/s. Khivraj Pearl,
(A Unit of Khivraj Motors),
No.6, Jawaharlal Nehru Road,
Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040.
3.The Branch Manager,
M/s. Indus Ind Bank,
No.34, (Old No.115/116),
G.N.Chetty Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017.
…..Opposite parties
Date of complaint : 10.11.2016
Counsel for complainant :M/s.S.Subbiah, M.T.Arunan
P.Vincy Rani, M.Divya
Counsel for 1st opposite party : M/s. V.Sankar&Lavanya Shankar
Counsel for 2nd opposite party : M/s. S.Govindraman,V.S.Srikrishnan
Counsel for 3rd opposite party : K.Moorthy, S.R.Sundar
O R D E R
BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,
Counsel for the opposite parties present. No representation for the complainant. The complaint was posted for filing the proof affidavit of the complainant 1st time on 14.03.2017. From that hearing the case was adjourned for 7 hearings for filing the proof affidavit of the complainant. He has not filed the same. Lastly from 26.09.2017 hearing today (25.10.2017) adjourned as last chance to file the proof affidavit of the complainant. However, there was no representation on behalf of the complainant till 04.00 p.m and also not filed his proof affidavit. The complainant also called absent.
The attitude of the complainant above shows that non filing of the proof affidavit that he has no interest in prosecuting the complaint. Hence the complaint is dismissed for default. No costs.
Pronounced by us on this 25th day of October 2017.
-sd- -sd-
MEMBER – IPRESIDENT
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.