Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

FA/219/2013

M. DEIVA GANDHI KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER - Opp.Party(s)

IN PERSON

24 Sep 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI – 600 003.

BEFORE         Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                            PRESIDENT

                         Tmt. Dr. S. M. LATHA MAHESWARI                           MEMBER

 

F.A. No.219/2013

                         DATED THE 24^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021

 

 

M. Deiva Gandhi Kumar,

Represented by Thiru. K. Muthiah,

General Power of Attorney (GPA Holder),

No.27, Third Street,

Railar Nagar,

Madurai – 625 018.                                                         .. Appellant / Complainant.

 

-Versus-

1. The Divisional Railway Manager,

Chennai Division, NGO Annexe,

Southern Railway,

Park Town,

Chennai – 600 003.

 

2. The Divisional Railway Manager,

Southern Railway,

Trichirapalli – 620 001.

 

3. The Chief Passenger Transportation Manager,

Southern Railway Head Quarters Office,

Chennai – 600 003.

 

4. The Chief Commercial Manager (Refunds),

Southern Railway Head Quarters Office,

Chennai – 600 003.                                                     .. Respondents /Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the Appellant / Complainant              : M/s. M. Deiva Gandhi Kumar

Counsel for the Respondents /Opposite parties   : M/s. K. Kumaran

 

          This appeal coming up before us on 24.09.2021 for appearance of appellant  and for arguments this Commission made the following order in open court:                                                                                                

 

Docket order

 

            No representation for appellant in person.  Respondents present.   This appeal is posted today for the appearance of appellant and for arguments.    When the matter was called at 10.30 A.M., the appellant in person not present.   Hence, passed over and called again at 12.15 P.M. then also, there is no representation for appellant in person.  Though it is specifically posted in the list today for arguments, the appellant in person remained absent.   Hence, keeping the appeal pending is of no use as appellant is not interested in prosecuting the case.

Hence, the appeal is dismissed for default.  No order as to cost.

 

 

                    Sd/-                                                                                      Sd/-                                                                        

S.M.LATHAMAHESWARI                                                                           R.SUBBIAH                        

          MEMBER                                                                                           PRESIDENT