The case record is posted today for re-hearing. Both the parties are absent and no step was taken on their behalf. On repeated calls, none appeared on behalf of both the parties. Thus, the hearing of the case could not be taken up. 

                                         In the present case, OP No.1 was set ex parte and OP No.2 appeared and filed his written version. As it appears from the case record, the case was posted to 20.08.2013 for order after being heard from both sides. But on the same day, the order could not be passed due to transfer of the President and Member (w). Thereafter, the case record is lingering for re-hearing of the case. As the complainant and the contesting OP No.2 remained absent, on 17.08.2017 notice against them was issued with a direction to remain present before this Commission for hearing of the case. In spite of the notice, neither the complainant remained present nor took any steps. From the above nature and conduct of the complainant, it is clearly made out that the complainant has no interest to prosecute his case properly, for which valuable time of this Commission is being wasted. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and conduct of the complainant, this Commission is of the view that the complaint of the complainant should be dismissed.

                                         Accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is dismissed for non-prosecution of the case. The interim order, if any, passed earlier against the Ops shall remain infructuous.