Mrs. Saroj Rajwade, Member—This appeal is directed against order dated 18.12.1996 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Balaghat (for short 'District Forum') in Complaint Case No. 39/96.

2. We do not propose to go into details of allegations and counter allegations by both parties, except to note few important and relevant points in the complaint.

(a) By his own admission the TV of the complainant was 12 years old and was not working. Therefore the value of old picture tube at the time of complaint was nil and the question of replacing and paying its cost does not arise.

(b) Opposite party in District Forum was not an authorised dealer and there is no pleading that he sold defective goods.

(c) There is also no pleading of hiring of service or deficiency of service; and

(d) It appears to be a petty dispute between two parties about doing a repair job.

Perusal of record and the pleadings contained therein reveal that in the original complaint filed before the District Forum, the complainant in paragraph 11 of his complaint had alleged that opposite party had cheated him and, therefore, he filed an FIR in Police Station Balaghat Town and police had registered