11.   Taking a clue from the above decision and absence of particulars regarding the date when claim was submitted it has to be inferred that the complainants did not act prudently and the repudiation by the 2^nd opposite party under Ex.A-1 is justified.   It can therefore be said that the opposite parties did not commit any deficiency of service.

12.   As the opposite parties did not commit any deficiency of service the complainants in our opinion are not entitled to any compensation.  Hence, these points are answered in favour of the opposite party.

13.  POINT No.3:-   In view of the above findings, in the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.

        Dictated to Junior Steno, transcribed by her, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 19^th day of              April, 2011.

Sd/-XXX                                           Sd/-XXX                             Sd/-XXX

MEMBER                                                         MEMBER                                 PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

   DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite party :  

                                                                                                                       PRESIDENT