Due to holiday, matter was listed today. Complainant-Respondent No. 1 filed complaint before the District Forum against the Petitioner/Opposite Party No. 2 and Respondent No. 2/Opposite Party No. 1. The District Forum allowed the complaint and directed both the Opposite Parties to replace the defected vehicle or pay costs of the vehicle alongwith 6% p.a. interest. Order of the District Forum dated 22.01.2010 was challenged by both the Opposite Parties before the State Commission and the State Commission vide impugned order dated 24.09.2012 dismissed both the appeals. Petitioner has filed this Revision Petition against the impugned order and Respondent No. 2/Opposite Party No. 1 has not preferred any Revision Petition against the impugned order. Petitioner and respondent no. 1 have filed joint compromise and requested that impugned order be modified and petitioner may be exonerated from the liability, as respondent no. 1 wants to proceed only against respondent no. 2, who has not filed any Revision Petition. In the light of compromise between the petitioner and respondent no. 1, Revision Petition is allowed and impugned order dated 24.09.2012, passed by the State Commission in Appeal No. 335/2010, M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs. Sh. Ravi Khandelwal & Ors. and order of the District Forum dated 22.01.2010, passed in complaint no. 429/2008, Ravi Khandelwal vs. Raj Automobile Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. is modified and complaint is dismissed against Petitioner/Opposite Party No. 2. Respondent No. 1 is free to get the order executed against the respondent no. 2.