Mr. Pawan Kumar Ray, counsel for the revision petitioner heard on admission.  Learned counsel seeks to limit the prayer in the revision petition only to the question of cost of litigation.  He points out that the cost/ compensation of Rs. 8,000/- had been awarded by the District Forum.

          2.       In this behalf the relevant para in the impugned order reads as follows:

          “Hence, under the facts and circumstances of the case and with a view to end the litigation between the parties, we dispose of this appeal with the modification in the impugned order to the extent that opposite party would replace the washing machine of the complainant with same model free of cost within 30 days from today.  However, compensation of Rs. 8,000/- and interest awarded to the complainant at the rate of 8% per annum by the District Forum is set aside.”

3.       The order of the State Commission, on the question of compensation and interest, clearly falls in the domain of its discretionary jurisdiction.  I find no justification to interfere with the same.  Consequently the prayer of the counsel made today is not allowed.  In the result, the revision petition stands dismissed.