By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President: <br /> <br /> The petitioner’s case is as follows:-<br /> 1. The petitioner came across a general offer published in Mathrubhoomi dated 23.5.07 that a Mahindra Alfa is for sale for a price of Rs.5999-00. The petitioner went over to the premises of the respondents and on the 23rd day 2007 afternoon, tendered the price and demanded delivery of the vehicle. Meanwhile the mechanical staff showed the vehicle for delivery to the petitioner, and set apart, the vehicle from other vehicles parked. With this act on the part of the respondent appropriation is over and the property in the goods belongs to the petitioner. But the respondent refused to give delivery of the vehicle. Hence the petition.<br /> 2. In the main petition, the respondents appeared but refused to file counter. Then cost was ordered by the Forum. But cost not paid and counter not filed. The respondents called absent and set exparte. <br /> 3. To prove the case of the petitioner, the petitioner has filed an affidavit and the documents produced by him were marked as Ext. P1 to P3. <br /> 4. Heard the Counsel.<br /> 5. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to get a Mahindra Alfa as the advertisement given in Mathrubhoomi dated 23.5.07. He also claims compensation and costs. There is no counter evidence.<br /> 6. So the petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to deliver a Mahindra Alfa for a price of Rs.5999/- (Rupees five thousand nine hundred and ninety nine only) and also directed to pay Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as compensation and Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) as costs to the petitioner. Time for compliance one month. <br /> <br /> Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 13th day of May 2008.<br />