Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

The Chief General Manager, State Bank Of ... vs Src Projects Private Ltd., Chief ... on 30 March, 2022

  	 Daily Order 	   

 IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

 

 CHENNAI - 600 003.

 

BEFORE         Hon'ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                        PRESIDENT 

 

                      Thiru. S. KARUPPIAH                                             JUDICIAL MEMBER

                      Thiru. R. VENKATESAPERUMAL                          MEMBER   F. A. No.166/2017   (Against the Order dt.14.02.2017 made in C.C. No.44/2013 on the file of D.C.D.R.C., Salem) DATED THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2022  

1. The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai - 400 021.

 

2. The Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Srirangapalayam Branch, Ramakrishna Road, Salem - 636 007.

 

3. The Chief Manager, State Bank of India, No.310, Sipcot Staff Housing Colony, Mookandapalli - 635 126, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.                                                 .. Appellants / Opposite parties.

-Versus-

SRC Projects Private Limited, M. Paramasivam, Chief Executive, No.4 B, Gandhi Road, Lakshmipuram, Salem - 636 007.                                                           .. Respondent / Complainant.

 

Counsel for Appellants / Opposite parties     : M/s. J. Pothiraj Counsel for Respondent / Complainant        : M/s. J. Ranjani Devi           This appeal coming up before us on 30.03.2022 for appearance of appellant and for filing written argument of appellant and for arguments (in list) or for dismissal and this Commission made the following Order in open court:                                                                                                

   
Docket Order   No representation for appellant.   Respondent present.  This appeal is posted today for appearance of appellant, for filing written argument of 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, the appeal is dismissed for default.   No order as to costs.
                 
                  Sd/-                                           Sd/-                                            Sd/-

 

R. VENKATESAPERUMAL                S. KARUPPIAH                               R.SUBBIAH

 

            MEMBER                             JUDICIAL MEMBER                           PRESIDENT