##PAGE1##

1

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

BEFORE : Hon’ble Justice R. SUBBIAH PRESIDENT

F.A.NO.1336/2025

(Against order in CC.NO.40/2025 on the file of the DCDRC, Nagapattinam)

DATED THIS THE 29^th DAY OF JANUARY 2026

M. Prabhakaran

S/o. Murugesan

2/184, Sivan Koil Street

Periyathumbur, Chinnathumbur Post M/s. P. Vijendran

Kilvelur Taluk Counsel for

Nagapattinam- 611 102 Appellant/ Complainant

Vs.

1. The Branch Manager

Equitas Small Finance Bank

Nagapattinam

2. The General Manager

Equitas Small Finance Bank Ltd.,

4^th Floor, Phase No.2, M/s. S. Suresh

No.769, Spencer Plaza Counsel for

Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 002 Respondents/ Opposite parties

The Appellant as complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission

against the opposite parties praying for certain direction. The District Commission had

dismissed the complaint for default. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by

the complainant praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt.31.7.2025 in

CC. No.40/2025.

This Appeal is placed before me for hearing finally today. Upon hearing the

arguments of the counsel appearing for bothsides, perusing the documents, lower court

records, and the order passed by the District Commission, this commission made the

following order in the open court:

ORDER

JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH , PRESIDENT (Open court)

1. The complainant before the District Commission is the appellant herein.

2

2. The appellant as complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission,

against the opposite party, by alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite

party in claiming excess amount towards loan due inspite of the fact that the complainant

has paid the entire loan amount and also for non-issuance of No due certificate.

3. Inspite of giving several opportunities, the complainant had not appeared which

had resulted in dismissal of the complaint for default. Hence the complainant is before

us now, as appellant, praying to set aside the order passed by the District Commission,

in dismissing the complaint for default.

4. The appellant/ complainant had submitted before this commission that the

absence was due to the communication lapse between the counsel and the complainant,

therefore the non-appearance of the complainant is neither willful nor wanton, and thus

prayed for an opportunity to contest the matter on merit by restoring the complaint for

fresh disposal.

5. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for bothsides. Considering the nature

of complaint, I am of the opinion that a chance may be given to the appellant/

complainant to agitate his right on merit, on certain condition, and accordingly the

appellant/ complainant by way of order dt.27.1.2026, was directed to deposit a sum of

Rs.3000/- towards cost to the Legal aid account of the State Commission, on or before

3

28.1.2026, which is complied with. Hence this appeal is allowed today by remanding

back the complaint to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law on merit.

6. In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the

District Commission, Nagapattinam in C.C.No.40/2025 dt.31.7.2025, and the

complaint is ordered to be restored to the file of District Commission,

Nagapattinam, for fresh disposal according to law on merit.

The parties are directed to appear before the District Commission,

Nagapattinam, on 2.3.2026. The District Commission, on restoring the

complaint to file, conduct the proceedings, and dispose of the complaint, as

expeditiously as possible, according to law on merit.

R. SUBBIAH

PRESIDENT

INDEX : YES / NO

Rsh/dRSJ/ ORDERS