Orissa

Baleshwar

CC/54/2016

Sri Raj Kumar Murmu, aged 33 years - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, SRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LTD., Balasore Branch - Opp.Party(s)

Sj. Sudhir Kumar Das & Others

05 Jun 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BALASORE
AT- KATCHERY HATA, NEAR COLLECTORATE, P.O, DIST- BALASORE-756001
 
Complaint Case No. CC/54/2016
( Date of Filing : 21 Apr 2016 )
 
1. Sri Raj Kumar Murmu, aged 33 years
S/o. Sri Samay Murmu, At- Bikash Nagar, Angargadia, P.S- Industrial Area, Dist- Balasore.
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Branch Manager, SRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LTD., Balasore Branch
At/P.O/P.S/Dist- Balasore.
2. The Administrative Officer, SRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LTD., Mumbai
101-105, 1st Floor, B.Wing, Shiv Chambers, Sector-11, C.B.D, Belapur, Navi Mumbai, Mumbai-400614.
Maharashtra
3. The M.D/ C.E.O, Register Office, Chennai
Mookambika Complex, Kama, 3rd Floor, No.4, Lady Deshika Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600004.
Tamil Nadu
4. Chandan Kumar Jena, aged 35 years
S/o. Not known to the Complainant, At/P.O- Gopalgan, P.S- Town, Dist- Balasore (The recognized representative/ Agent under the O.P No.1)
Odisha
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. NILAKANTHA PANDA PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. JIBAN KRUSHNA BEHERA MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 05 Jun 2023
Final Order / Judgement

                                         The case record is posted today for filing of W/A by both Parties & hearing. Neither the complainant nor his Advocate is present nor taken any step. The Ops are also absent. On repeated calls, none respond on behalf of both the parties. Hence, hearing of the case could not be taken up.   

                                         In the present case, the O.P No.2 was appeared and filed written version, whereas the O.Ps No.1 & 4 were set ex-parte and the case against the O.P No.3 was dismissed. As it appears from the case record, the complainant remained absent and slept over the matter since 14.03.2018 and no step is taken nor did his advocate take any step on his behalf. From the above nature and conduct of the complainant, it is clearly made out that the complainant has no interest to proceed with the case further, for which valuable time of this Commission is being wasted. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and conduct of the complainant, this Commission is of the view that the complaint of the complainant should be dismissed.                          

                                         Accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is dismissed for non-prosecution of the case.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. NILAKANTHA PANDA]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JIBAN KRUSHNA BEHERA]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.