GYANENDRA KUMAR MOHANTY Vs. KINETIC HONDA MOTOR COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was not present either in person or through any authorised repersentative at the time when the appeal was taken up for hearing. However, the appellant had sent a written representation addressed to the Registry forwarding notes of his arguments and stating that on account of financial difficulty, it would not be possible for him to appear personally or to engage an Advocate at the time of hearing of the case.

(2.) We have accordingly given our careful consideration to the points raised in the written notes submitted by the appellant.

(3.) The appeal arises out of the order dated July 1,1991 passed by the State Commission, Orissa disposing of the appellant's Complaint Petition C.D.No.87 of 1990 by issuing certain directions to the Opposite partices,. The complainant (appellant) had purchased a Kinetic Honda Scooter manufactured by the first respondent company. The grievance with which the appellant approached the State Commission was that in the brochure published by the company they had represented that the fuel efficiency of the vehicle was such as to give 48.8 kilometers per litre of Petrol under ordinary Indian conditions and that it gone in for the purchase of the Scooter in question. According to the complainant his Scooter was not having the fuel efficiency mentioned in the company's brochure and even after repairs were got effected by the service engineer of the manufacturer, the fuel consumption rate of his Scooter was only 25- 30 kms. per litre within the city and 35-38 kms. per litre in long stretches of free road. On the basis of these allegations the appellant prayed for the reliefs of replacement of his Scooter by a new vehicle having the fuel efficiency as mentioned in the brochure and also the award of adequate compensation for the inconvenience and loss caused to him.