State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
D. Ashok Kumar Advocate Old No.164 New ... vs Dr. R.Thangasamy, B.E. Ph.D 18/10 3Rd ... on 1 August, 2012
BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI BEFORE : Honble Thiru Justice R. REGUPATHI PRESIDENT Thiru A.K. ANNAMALAI MEMBER
(JUDICIAL) F.A.NO.216/2011 (Against order in C.C.NO.8/2010 on the file of the DCDRF, Chennai (North) DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF AUGUST 2012 D. Ashok Kumar Advocate Old No.164 New No.340 Mr. S. Natarajan Thambu Chetty Street Counsel for George Town, Chennai -1 Appellant / Opposite party Vs. Dr. R.Thangasamy, B.E. Ph.D 18/10 3rd Street Tamilnadu NGO Colony Adambakkam, Chennai-88 Rep. by R.Murugesan S/o.
Ramasamy K. Chettipalayam Veerapandi Village, Tirupur (In person) As his power agent Respondent/ Complainant The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying for certain direction. The District Forum partly allowed the complaint. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.01.12.2010 in CC. No.8/2010.
This petition coming before us for hearing finally today. Upon hearing the arguments of the counsel for the appellant, and the respondent in person, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order in the open court:
JUSTICE R. REGUPATHI, PRESIDENT (Open court)
1. Both appellant, and the respondent/complainant in person present. Though initially, by appearing in person, the respondent/ complainant argued vehemently that the order impugned must be upheld, on request by the respondent/ Advocate, appeared for the complainant in the High Court of Madras, concerned in the complaint, expressing his regret, and by rendering apology, sought for compromise, and the same was fairly accepted by the complainant/ respondent, and both parties, in our presence compromised the dispute, and under such circumstances, nothing survives in the appeal and the same is disposed of accordingly.
2. In the result the appeal is disposed of, by setting aside the order of District Forum in CC.8/2010 dt.1.12.2010. No order as to cost.
Registry as well as the District Forum is directed to handover the mandatory deposit/ deposit, made by the appellant/ opposite party, to the appellant duly discharged.
A.K. ANNAMALAI R. REGUPATHI JUDICIALMEMBER PRESIDENT INDEX : YES / NO Rsh/d/mtj/FB/ Open court