V.B. Gupta, Presiding Member—Petitioner/O.P. No.1 being aggrieved by order dated 4.12.2012 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh (for short, ‘State Commission’)has filed the present revision petition.

2. Respondent No.1/Complainant had filed a consumer complaint against the petitioner as well as Respondent No.2/O.P. No.2 on the ground that petitioner had supplied bad quality of engine oil due to which engine of his vehicle was seized and the engine oil had been produced by respondent no.2.

3. District Forum issued notice of the complaint to the petitioner as well as respondent no. 2 but they did not appear before it and as such both were proceeded ex parte.

4. District Forum, vide its order dated 15.10.2011 partly allowed the complaint.

5. District Forum’s order was challenged by the petitioner before the State Commission.

6. On 4.12.2012, when the matter was listed before the State Commission, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner and as such appeal of the petitioner was dismissed in default.

7. Being aggrieved by the order of State Commission, petitioner has filed this petition.

8. It has been contended by the learned counsel for