A M MATHEW Vs. M PRADEEP KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second opposite party in O. P. No.349/96 on the file of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kollam is the appellant.

(2.) The complainant alleged before the District Forum that the complainant booked the Drama of the first opposite party 'soumyasagaram' for staging the same on 14.3.1993 at 11.30 p. m. in connection with the festival of the temple. The complainant and the second opposite party on behalf of the first opposite party entered into Exbt. A1 agreement for the said purpose and the second opposite party received an amount of Rs.200/- as advance. The grievance of the complainant is, as per the agreement the first opposite party did not perform the Drama on 14.3.1995. The complainant alleged, that would constitute deficiency of service and, therefore, wanted relief. The complainant produced Exbt. A1 and gave evidence as P. W.1. The second opposite party gave evidence as R. W.1.

(3.) On a consideration of the said evidence the District Forum found deficiency of service and directed the second opposite party to return the advance amount with compensation of Rs.3,000/- with costs Rs.250/-. The said direction is challenged by the second opposite party in this appeal. The first respondent/complainant and the second respondent/the first opposite party though were served from this appeal they remain absent. Thereupon the appellant's learned Counsel is heard.