Order

The respondent No. 1 has filed the Vakalatnama of      Sh. Prahlad Singh, Advocate and respondent No. 2 has filed the Vakalatnama of Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate. Both the Vakalatnamas be filed on record.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 1-complainant has admitted this fact before this Commission that a sum of Rs. 6,000/-, as has been directed by the District Forum, has been paid by the dealer-respondent No. 2 to the respondent No. 1-complainant. 

Now we find that there is no dispute with regard to the payment of Rs. 6,000/- to be paid to the respondent     No. 1-complainant by the dealer-respondent No. 2 and we are of the view that the direction issued by the District Forum in this regard has been complied with.

As the direction issued by the District Forum for payment of money to the respondent No. 1-complainant has been complied with and in these circumstances, we do not find any necessity for directing the appellant-Samsung India Electronic Pvt. Ltd. to pay a sum of Rs. 1.00 lac, as compensation to be deposited in the District Forum, we accordingly set aside the direction issued by the District Forum in this regard. 

On the basis of the aforesaid observation, the appeal is finally disposed of, consequently the delay condonation application filed by the appellant, is also disposed of.