MANAGER BAJAJ AUTO LIMITED Vs. M N TAWARE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order of District Forum, Pune, dated 8.7.1993 passed in Complaint No. 836 of 1991. A complaint was made by Shri M.N. Taware alleging that Kawasaki Motor Cycle, manufactured by M/s. Bajaj Auto Ltd. was defective good in as much as it was not giving the average consumption of pertrol, as per the advertisements given by the manufacturer. The complainant tried to explain the defects in his complaint. According to complainant, the Motor Cycle in question was to give an average of 80 km. per liter during the fresh conditions. But in reality, it was giving 65 km. per liter. It is pertinent to note that there is no literature or record produced by the manufacturer as to how the advertisement given in the newspaper about the consumption of pertrol by Kawasaki Bajaj was correct. According to complainant there were false advertisements as regards the particular standard, quality and style of Kawasaki Model. Under sec. 2(r) of the Consumer Protection Act, unfair trade practice is defined. It means a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice, including a false representation that the goods are of a particular standard, quality, compensation and style. According to complainant, the Motor cycle purchased by him was not confirming to the standard which was advertised by the manufacturer and therefore, the manufacturer, viz. Opposite Party committed unfair trade practice. The District Forum, therefore, held that the complainant suffered a loss and therefore, awarded him Rs. 2,000 as compensation and directed the opposite party to repair the vehicle, so that it can give an average consumption which is nearer to the ideal average as advertised by the opposite party.

(2.) We have heard Shri Srinivasan, for appellant and Shri D.D. Ubhe, for respondent. After hearing both the sides, we find that the District Forum has been correct in its finding as regards inadequacy in the performance of vehicle as regards the consumption of petrol. Under these circumstances, in our view, the order passed by the District Forum is required to be maintained. In the result, we find no substance in this appeal and hence it is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.