AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 235 wordsTHIS appeal has been filed by the opposite parties against the order of the District Forum, Bikaner date 31.7.92 whereby the District Forum had directed appellants Nos. 1 and 3 to repair the television of the complainant within 15 days from the date the same was brought to their premises by the complainant and, further awarded a compensation of Rs. 500/- to the complainant.
IT may be mentioned that appearance was put on behalf of the appellant on 23.11.94, but none appeared for the appellant thereafter. On behalf of the complainant-respondent power was filed by Mr. N.K. Vyas, Advocate on 15.2.95, but none appeared for the respondent thereafter. We have, therefore, gone through the order of the District Forum and perused the record. It is clear that the complainant had made a complaint to opposite party No. 3 that the television was not working properly. Mechanic from Delhi was also called for by opposite party No. 3, but defect was not removed. During the course of arguments before the District Forum it was represented on behalf of opposite parties that the other opposite parties had talked with opposite party No. 1 and the distributor had agreed to repair the television without any additional charges. In such circumstances, the order of the District Forum cannot be said to be wrong.
This appeal has no merit in it and it is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.