State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Mr. Dinesh Valji Chheda vs Mr. Rahul Kumar, Amul G.C.M.M.F. Ltd. on 30 November, 2011
BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
Complaint Case No.
CC/05/107
1.Mr. Dinesh Valji Chheda 18, Vijay Apartments, Khetwadi, 12th Lane, Mumbai 400 004 ...........Complainant(s) Versus
1. Mr. Rahul Kumar, AMUL G.C.M.M.F. Ltd.
22/A, Rampart House, 5th floor, K. D. Marg, Next to Rythm House, Kala Goda, Fort, Mumbai 400 023.
2. Chairman / MD, Amul GCMMF Ltd.
604, GIDC, Vithal Udyognagar, Anand 388 121 ............Opp.Party(s) BEFORE:
Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar PRESIDING MEMBER Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar Member PRESENT:
None present.
ORDER ORDER :- (Per Shri P.N.Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member) (1) This complaint was filed on 02/09/2007. After filing the complaint, only once the complainant appeared on 15/09/2005 and the matter was adjourned to 24/11/2005. Thereafter, he did not turn up. As an unattended complaint, this complaint was placed before us for the first time for disposal on 19/07/2011. The Intimation of that date was displayed on notice board and published on internet board of the Commission. On 19/07/2011, on finding that appellant as well as the respondent was absent, we directed office by way of abundant precaution, to intimate next date of hearing i.e. 14/09/2011 to both the parties. As the office did not intimate both the parties, on 14/11/09/2011, we again directed to office to intimate the next date of hearing to both the parties. Accordingly, on 03/11/2011, office issued notices to the parties. On 30/11/2011 i.e. today, the appellant as well as the respondent are absent. We, therefore, have no option but to dismiss the complaint in default.
Pronounced on 30th November, 2011.
[Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar] PRESIDING MEMBER [Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar] Member pgg