Petitioner was opposite party No.2 before the District Forum.

        Complainant/Respondent purchased GI pipes and fittings from Ram Gopal Lakhmi Chand & Co. (opposite party No.1), which were manufactured by the petitioner, for construction of his house by paying a sum of Rs.70,000/-.  Complaint was filed with the allegation that the pipes sold to him were defective; that after some time the respondent found leakage in the walls and other parts of the building including the flooring of first floor and bathroom.

        District Forum allowed the complaint.  Opposite party No.1 was directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant which included the costs as well.

        Complainant, being aggrieved, filed the appeal before the State Commission.  State Commission allowed the appeal and directed the petitioner, who is the manufacturer of the pipes and Opposite party No.1 to pay the price of the pipes, i.e., Rs.70,000/- to the complainant in equal shares on his returning the GI pipes.  Rs.5,000/- were awarded by way of costs.

        The revision petition was admitted on 17.4.2007.  In spite of repeated adjournments, complainant/respondent was not served.  On 29.8.2011, fresh notices were ordered to be issued to the complainant.  Process was ordered to be given dasti as well.  Notice sent to the complainant has not been received back served or otherwise.  Counsel for the petitioner did not collect the dasti process.  It seems that the respondent/complainant cannot be served in ordinary way.  The only alternative is to serve the respondent by way of substituted service by publication of notice in the newspapers.  Cost of publication would be more than the amount involved in the revision petition.  As per order of the State Commission, the sum of Rs.70,000/- and costs of Rs.5,000/- has to be shared equally by the petitioner and Opposite party No.1.  The share of the petitioner comes to Rs.37,500/- only.

        We put an end to the litigation and dismiss the revision petition leaving the question of law open.  The order passed by the State Commission be not taken as precedent for future reference.