By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President<br /> <br /> Petitioner’s case is as follows:<br /> <br /> The petitioner is a Cene Artist. He is a busy man. He requires periodical travels and needs a fast moving vehicle like a Motor Bike or Scooter. The petitioner came across with a general offer made by the respondent in ‘Malayala Manorama’ daily dated 26th February 2007 that, a Hero Honda Glamour Motor Bike is available for Rs.5,999/-. Fascinated by the offer, he approached the respondent with the money prescribed, but the respondent refused to deliver the vehicle by accepting the money. It is an unfair trade practice committed by the respondent. Lawyer notice sent on 28th February 2007. The notice was received but no reply. No remedy. Hence the complaint.<br /> <br /> 2. The notice from the Forum is accepted by the respondent on 19/5/07 . The case was posted to 6/7/07. When the case was called, he was absent and declared exparte.<br /> <br /> 3. To prove the case of the petitioner he has filed an affidavit and three documents which are marked as Exts. P1 to P3.<br /> <br /> 4.Heard the Counsel.<br /> <br /> 5. According to the petitioner he is entitled to get the vehicle for the price notified in general offer as per Ext.P1. He also claims compensation for tribulations and also costs. There is no counter evidence to the evidence of petitioner. So the petition is allowed and the respondent is directed to deliver the complainant the vehicle for the price notified in the general offer, which is described in Ext.P1. He also entitled for Rs.1000/- for mental agony and Rs.250/- towards costs. Time for compliance one month<br /> <br /> <br /> Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open forum this the 18th day of April 2008.<br />