Learned counsel for the appellant is present.

2.           None appears for the respondent. The service of summon against the respondent is held sufficient.

3.           Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

  4.       The appellant was the OP whereas the respondent was the complainant before the learned District Forum. Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to  with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.        

  5.                Learned counsel for the appellant submitted  that the complainant allegedly purchased a motor cycle from OP No.1 and after purchase the motor cycle became out of order. He went to OP No.2 for service. Even after service on 2-3 occasion the vehicle’s defect was not removed. So he informed the Ops that  due to manufacturing defect he is not able to use the vehicle properly. Since, Ops did not take action, complainant filed the complaint.

   6.                Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that OP No.2 appeared and filed written version admitting to have repaired the vehicle but OP No.1 & 3 did not appear due to communication gap. He submitted that learned District Forum, without giving opportunity to OP No.1 & 3 of being heard disposed of the case.

7.                 Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that learned District Forum opined wrongly that vehicle became out of order time and again due to manufacturing defect but no expert was examined to contribute this finding. So, the impugned order of the learned District Forum should be set-aside and the case should be remanded to the learned District Forum for giving opportunity to OP No.1 & 3 of being heard.

8.               Considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellant, perused the DFR and impugned order.

  9.              The impugned order clearly shows that OP No.1 & 3 have not participated in the hearing and they have not filed the written version. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that due to inaction of the Advocate for the Ops the OP No.1 & 3 could not appear and participate. He submitted to set-aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal. It is an admitted fact that OP No.1 & 3 have not been heard in this case. It is well settled in law that for latches of the lawyers the parties should not be allowed to suffer.

10.        In view of the above analysis the impugned order of the learned District Forum is set-aside and the case is remanded to the learned District Forum for fresh disposal in accordance with law. Learned District Forum would give opportunity to OP No.1 & 3 to file written version and adduce evidence if any. It is made clear that  this Commission has not opined on the merit of the case. So, the learned District Forum would do well to direct the OP No.1 & 3 to file written version and give opportunity to both the parties to adduce evidence if any further and would decide the case within 30 days from the date of this order. Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned District Forum on 21.01.2021 and take further instruction.

              Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective  parties.                           

                DFR be sent back forthwith.