Heard learned counsel for the appellant.None appears for the respondents.

2.      As it appears from the complaint petition and impugned order that the complainant had purchased one Samsung ASGH-x620  Model mobile  Hand set from O.P.no.1. But that hand set became defective during warranty period for which complainant handed over it to OP No.1 for repair. O.P.no.1 returned the handset in writing to complainant as the problem cannot be removed due to non availability of spare parts. The complainant claimed to refund  the cost of the handset. O.P.no.1 refused to refund the cost. Therefore, she filed the complaint.

3.      The O.P.no.1 appeared and submitted that the complainant has purchased the mobile hand set and the mobileset   was troubled due to want of spare parts. Further, he submitted that the complainant had never raised any complaint before O.P.no.1. So the dealer is not responsible.

4.      The O.P.no.2 was set exparte.

5.      After hearing both parties, the learned District Commission has passed the impugned  order which is as follows:

           xxx                             xxx                    xxx

“ The complaint petition is allowed on contest against  O.Ps.1 and 3 and exparte against O.p.no.2 without cost. The O.Ps 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs.20,000.00 to the complainant and to refund the cost of the mobile hand set which is found to be Rs.7549.00 and to replace the new set by taking away the defective set from the complainant. All these directions are to be complied within 3 months from the date of this order. Parties are to bear their own cost throughout.”

6.      Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that  appellant is  O.P.no.2 and  it was set exparte without service of summon against them. She submitted that she has not received the summon.  She drew attention of this Commission of the impugned order. It is alleged that she has preferred to repair the mobile hand set which was submitted by O.P.no.1. She submitted that if one chance is given to  O.P.no.2 to make the hand set working condition, the matter would be disposed of. On the other hand, no  opportunity  was given  to OP No. 2  of being heard.

7.      Considered the submission.Perused the impugned order and other materials on record.

8.      As it appears from the impugned order that the OP.no.1 has sold the mobile hand set to the complainant . The O.P.no.2  is no way in the agreement to the complainant.Be that as it may,  no opportunity was given to the present appellant of being heard with regard to merit of the case.  The entire order passed against him is illegal and wrong. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the learned DistrictCommission to give opportunity to both parties for denovo hearing  and  dispose of the matter in accordance with law and pass speaking order.

9.      It is made clear that the learned District Commission shall dispose of the matter afresh on perusal of all the materials  available on record. Further, the learned District Commission is directed to dispose of the matter within a period of 60 days from the date of  receipt of this order. Learned counsel for the  appellant is directed to appear before the learned District Commission on 27.04.2023 to take further instruction from it.

10.     The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

          DFR be sent back forthwith.

        Supply free copy of this order to the respective parties or the copy of this order be downloadEdit Anchored from Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy supplied from this Commission.