Learned counsel for the petitioner. Factual matrix are that petitioner had left his Maruti Car for denting and painting in workshop of respondent. When petitioner visited after an interval of 10 days, work was incomplete. Petitioner alleges to have paid Rs.5,000/- for the work which is acknowledged by respondent. After petitioner took delivery of vehicle from workshop of respondent, he noticed that engine of Car had been replaced by respondent and some spare parts too appeared to have been changed. Though engine was replaced, spare parts were not changed by respondent. Aggrieved with conduct of respondent, a consumer complaint came to be filed with District Forum, which was resisted by respondent. District Forum on evaluation of pleadings of the -2- parties, dismissed complaint. After an appeal was preferred with State Commission, State Commission on acceptance of replacement of engine of Car by respondent and there being no evidence about replacement of spare parts of vehicle, despite there being no finding of technical expert, having accepted appeal, saddled respondent with compensation of Rs.12,000/- to be paid to petitioner within a period of two months with a default clause that in case of failure, interest would be payable @ 9% p.a. The defence of the respondent before Fora below also had been that since total cost of denting and painting was Rs.8,476/- and petitioner had paid only a sum of Rs.5,000/- the complaint was filed just to avoid payment of residual amount. Be that as it may, since finding of State Commission has not been challenged by respondent and petitioner has been adequately compensated for his Car having remained with workshop of respondent for considerable time, revision petition being without substance is dismissed with no order as to costs.