Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

209/2014

Vimal Dhariwal - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, Eureka Forbes Limited, - Opp.Party(s)

S.S.Mugundhan

17 Aug 2016

ORDER

 

 

                                                                            Complaint presented on:  31.10.2014

                                                                                Order pronounced on:  26.09.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.:           MEMBER II

 

MONDAY THE 26^th    DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016

 

                                       C.C.NO.209/2014

 

Vimal Dhariwal,

No.6, 1^st Main Road,

Shenoy Nagar,

Chennai – 600 030.

                                                                                   ..... Complainant

 

                                     ..Vs..

1.The Manager,

Eureka Forbes Limited,

No.M-73, Ground Floor,

Old No.M-1, 3^rd Avenue,

Anna Nagar East,

Chennai – 102.

 

2.The Manager,

Eureka Forbes Limited,

14, Burkit Road, T.Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017.

 

3.The Manager,

M/s. Rasa Care,

N-Block, No.4/454, 22^nd Street,

Anna Nagar (East),

Chennai – 102.

 

                                                                 …..Opposite parties

 

Date of complaint                                            : 05.11.2014

Counsel for complainant                       : S.S.Mugundhan

 

Counsel for Opposite Parties                 : M/s.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi

                                                                   (INDUS ASSOCIATES)

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

Counsel for Opposite Party present.  No representation for Complainant till 12.15 p.m. Proof Affidavit of Complainant not filed inspite of posted today as last chance. Complainant also called absent. Hence the Complaint is dismissed for non filing of proof affidavit and the Complainant has no interest in prosecuting the Complaint. Hence the Complaint is dismissed for default. No costs.

 Pronounced by us on this 26^th  day of September 2016.

 

      -sd-                                                                                 -sd-     

MEMBER – II                                                              PRESIDENT