(1)               This appeal is lying unattended from 2003.  The appellant also has not bothered to take circulation for getting first order passed.  Therefore, on 04/07/2011, this matter was taken out and placed before us for disposal.  Intimation of that date was displayed on notice board and published on internet board of the Commission.   As office did not issue notice as per the direction dated 04/07/2011, on 10/08/2011, we directed the office to comply with the said direction.  On 10/08/2011, on finding that appellant as well as the respondent were absent, we directed office to issue notice informing next date of hearing i.e. 11/10/2011 to both the parties.  Accordingly, on 13/09/2011, office issued notices to the parties.  On 11/10/2011 i.e. today, the appellant as well as the respondent are absent.  Therefore, we are deciding the matter on merit. 

(2)               This appeal is filed by the original opponent No.1 against the order dated 30/12/2002 in Consumer Complaint No. 316/98 passed by the District Forum, Thane.   The forum below directed Opponent No.1 & 2 jointly and severally to carry out services of Bajaj Classic Scooter of the complainant bearing No.MH-05/J 5615 to the satisfaction of the complainant free of cost within three months from the date of receipt of the order. Further the opponent No.1 is directed to replace the necessary parts at their cost while carrying the service as above.  Aggrieved by this order, the opponent No.1 filed this appeal. 

(3)               We perused the impugned order.  We are finding that the complainant purchased Bajaj Classic Scooter for `27,055/- on 06/11/1996.  On the day of delivery, warranty card and servicing coupens were given to the complainant.  Within 15 days, from the date of delivery, key was broken and half of key portion remained inside.  Due to it, the complainant could not put the lock to the said vehicle.  On 21/11/1996, complainant took the scooter for servicing, but the opponent called him on 23/11/1996.  On 23/11/1996, the complainant took the scooter for servicing, but the opponent called him after a week and servicing was not done.  The complainant complained that the scooter could not start without giving choke.  On 26/09/1997, the complainant gave scooter for servicing & repairing to the opponent, but the opponent did not carry out the servicing and repairs.  Hence, the complainant filed consumer complaint claiming that his scooter should be repaired so that it could run 76 km per litre under standard test condition and it should start without choke.  The complainant should be given separate key and lock.  Servicing should be done by the opponent and all defects be removed.  After considering facts and circumstances of the case, the forum below directed Opponent No.1 & 2 jointly and severally to carry out services of Bajaj Classic Scooter of the complainant bearing No.MH-05/J 5615 to the satisfaction of the complainant free of cost within three months from the date of receipt of the order. Further the opponent No.1 is directed to replace the necessary parts at their cost while carrying the service as above.  Aggrieved by this order, the opponent No.1 filed this appeal. 

(4)               We perused the impugned order.  We are finding that the order passed by the forum below directing the opponents to carry out services of Bajaj Classic Scooter of the complainant bearing No.MH-05/J 5615 to the satisfaction of the complainant free of cost is just and proper.  The defects developed to the scooter of the complainant are within warranty period.  It is the duty of the opponents to remove the defect in the scooter.   Hence, the order passed by the forum below is just and proper and sustainable in law.  We find no substance in the appeal filed by the opponent No.1.  Hence, the order.

ORDER

(1)     Appeal stands dismissed.

(2)     No order as to costs.

(3)     Inform the parties accordingly.

Pronounced on 11^th September, 2011.