Tamil Nadu

Thiruvallur

RBT/CC/109/2022

G.Vinodh Kumar,S/o.G.Gyanaram - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, Rohini Theatre Silver Screen - Opp.Party(s)

Party in person

24 Aug 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
THIRUVALLUR
No.1-D, C.V.NAIDU SALAI, 1st CROSS STREET,
THIRUVALLUR-602 001
 
Complaint Case No. RBT/CC/109/2022
 
1. G.Vinodh Kumar,S/o.G.Gyanaram
ch-107
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Manager, Rohini Theatre Silver Screen
koyambedu ch-107
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  TMT.Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L.,Ph.D(Law) PRESIDENT
  THIRU.J.JAYASHANKAR, B.A.,B.L., MEMBER
  THIRU.P.MURUGAN, B.Com MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Party in person, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 24 Aug 2022
Final Order / Judgement

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
THIRUVALLUR

 BEFORE  TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L, Ph.D (Law)                                     .…. PRESIDENT
                 THIRU. J.JAYASHANKAR, B.A, B.L.                                                                                ..… MEMBER-I
                 THIRU P.MURUGAN, B.Com.,                                                                                       ….. MEMBER-II
CC. No.109/2022
THIS WEDNESDAY, THE 24th DAY OF AUGUST 2022

G.Vinodh Kumar, S/o.G.Gyanaram,
Indian Inhabitant, Residing at No.13/9, 8th Street,
Moogambigai Nagar, Nerkundram, Chennai 600 017.                                              ....Complainant.
                                                                                       //Vs//
The Manager, 
Rohini Theatre (Silver Screen),
Having its registered office at No.141/2,
Poonamallee High Road, Koyambedu,
Chennai -600 107.                                                                                                             ....Opposite party.

Counsel for the complainant                                     : Party in Person.
Counsel for the opposite party                                 : M/s.Karthik Raja, Advocate.


ORDER
PRONOUNCED BY TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI,   PRESIDENT.

               The complaint was filed by the complainant U/S 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in collecting excessive amount along with a prayer to direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards compensation for the deficiency in service and to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- towards cost of the proceeding to the complainant. 
No representation for complainant inspite of sufficient opportunities given.  Proof affidavit not filed.  This Commission is of the view that there is no purpose in keeping the complaint on file.  Hence Complaint dismissed for non prosecution.  No cost.
This order was pronounced by us in the open Commission on this 24th August 2022.

Sd-                                                                       Sd-                                                                Sd-
MEMBER-II                                                   MEMBER-I                                                 PRESIDENT

 

 
 
[ TMT.Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L.,Ph.D(Law)]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ THIRU.J.JAYASHANKAR, B.A.,B.L.,]
MEMBER
 
 
[ THIRU.P.MURUGAN, B.Com]
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.