Haryana

Karnal

219/2010

Ram sarup S/o Lakhmi Dass - Complainant(s)

Versus

Uttar Haryana Bijle Vitran Nigam Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. G.P. Singh

14 Jan 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.  

                                                          Complaint No.219 of 2010

                                                          Date of instt.: 26.3.2010

                                                          Date of decision: 14.01.2016

 

Shri Ram Sarup alias Shri Ram son of Shri Lakhmi Dass, since deceased now represented by hie legal heir Smt.Nirmala Devi  widow of Shri Ram Sarup alias  Shri Ram son of Sh.Lakhmi Dass resident of house no.Ra-648 Sadar Bazar, Karnal.

.                                                                   ……..Complainant    

                                      Vs.

1.Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Shakti Bhawan, Sector 6, Panchkula, through its Managing Director.

2.Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited Sub Division City, Karnal through its Sub Divisional Officer.

                                                                           ……… Opposite Parties

                     Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer

                     Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.                

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-        None for the complainant.

                   Sh.Sanjiv Lather Advocate for the Opposite Parties.

ORDER:                 

                                    The case called several times since morning but none put into appearance on behalf of the complainant.  The learned counsel for the complainant Sh.G.P.Singh Advocate had lastly appeared on behalf of the complainant on 10.4.2015 and thereafter neither the complainant nor her counsel put into appearance before this Forum. On the last date of hearing i.e 17.12.2015, court notice was ordered to be issued to the complainant, which has been duly served, but today none appeared on behalf of the complainant. It seems that the complainant is no more interested in pursuing with the present complaint. It is already 4.00PM. Further wait is not justified. Therefore, the present complaint is dismissed in default.    

 The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced
dated:14.01.2016

                                                                    (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

            (Anil Sharma ) 

               Member.