Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

FA/110/2021

M. Jayaprakash, Proprietor, Aravind Builders, - Complainant(s)

Versus

V.R. Ponmudi, S/o Late V. Rathanam - Opp.Party(s)

m/s. M. Duraimurugan

05 Jun 2023

ORDER

IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI – 600 003.

BEFORE          Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                           PRESIDENT

                      Thiru. R. VENKATESAPERUMAL                           MEMBER

 

F.A. No.110/2021

 

(Against the Order dt.08.02.2019 made in C.C. No.129/2011 on the file of

D.C.D.R.C., Chennai (South))

DATED THE 05^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023

 

1. M. Jayaprakash,

Proprietor,

Aravind Builders,

No.42/151, B.E. Colony,

Vadapalani,

Chennai – 600 026.

 

2. Aravind Builders,

Represented by its Proprietor,

No.129, Jawaharlal Nehru Road,

Senthil Nagar,

Choolaimedu,

Chennai – 600 094.                                        .. Appellants / Opposite parties 1 & 2.

 

-Versus-

1. V.R. Ponmudi,

S/o. Late V. Rathanam,

 

2. P. Bhanumathi,

W/o. Mr. V.R. Ponmudi,

Both residing at:-

Flat –C3, Sri Padmavathy Orchard,

Old No.2, New No.3, 3^rd Street,

Kamaraj Nagar,

Choolaimedu,

Chennai – 600 094.                                          .. Respondents  / Complainants 1 & 2.  

 

Counsel for Appellants / Opposite parties 1 & 2    : M/s. M. Duraimurugan

Counsel for Respondents  / Complainants 1 & 2   : M/s. C. Jayachitra

                       This appeal coming up before us on 05.06.2023 for appearance of the appellant and for arguments (list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                                                                

 

Docket Order

 

           No representation for the appellants.  Respondents present.  

This appeal is posted today for appearance of the appellant and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal. 

When the matter was called at 10.30 A.M., the appellant was not present.   Hence, passed over and called again at 12.00 Noon still, there is no representation for the appellant.  Hence, we are of the view that keeping the appeal pending is of no use as the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the case.

Hence, this appeal is dismissed for default.    No costs.

 

 

               

                Sd/-                                                                                              Sd/-                                                                        

R.VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                        R.SUBBIAH                       

             MEMBER                                                                                     PRESIDENT