M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party to replace the old and rusted tuner, to return Rs.1350/-, to pay Rs.6500/- towards expenses, alongwith compensation of Rs.50000/-. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.27.05.2008 in CC. No.24/2008. This petition coming before us for hearing finally today. Upon hearing the arguments of the appellant counsel on eitherside, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order in the open court: The appellant who suffered an adverse order, having remained exparte before the District Forum, has come to this commission, for redressal.
(2.) The respondent/complainant, had purchased an Onida TV. The opposite party is the authorized/recognized service provider. It seems, the TV had created some problem, for which the complainant had taken the TV to the opposite party for service. Despite the alleged repair, as said in the complaint, there was no proper rectification, resulting further problem, and thus accusing the service provider, as if had committed deficiency in service, as well as negligent act, a consumer complaint came to be filed before the District Forum, claiming replacement of the faulted parts, as well the amount collected towards service charges, in addition to a sum of Rs.50000/- as compensation.
(3.) Before the District Forum, though the opposite party was served, not appeared either in person, or through counsel, opposing the claim, and it appears, even before filing of the complaint, notice was issued, for which also there was no reply. Considering all these facts, the District Forum purely placing reliance upon the affidavit of the complainant, more or less passed an order, as prayed for, which is under challenge before this commission.;