KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL NO.305/09 JUDGMENT DATED.3.10.09 PRESENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT SMT.VALSALA SARANGADHARAN -- MEMBER SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA -- MEMBER Sajeev Kumar, Prasanthi Bhavan, Neendakara.P.O Neendakara, Kollam. -- APPELLANT (By Adv.R.S.Kalkura) Vs. 1. The General Manager, Hero Honda Motors Ltd., 34, Community Basanth Vihar, New Delhi – 110057. 2.The Area Manager, -- RESPONDENTS Hero Honda Motors Ltd., 3-E2,3rd Floor, Saniya Plaza, Mahakavi Bharathiyar Road, New Korte Bus Stand, Cochin. 3. The Manager, M/s.Venad Auto Mobiles, 425, Curzon Road, Kollam. (By Adv.P.A.Prij) JUDGMEN JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellant is the complainant in OP.183/05 in the file of CDRF, Kollam. The complaint has been allowed in part. The complainant has filed the appeal aggrieved by the order of the Forum allowing the complaint in part only. The complaint had sought for replacement from the motorcycle. But the Forum allowed only replacement of certain parts. 2. The case of the complainant is that he purchased a new Hero Honda Passion Plus motorcycle seeing the advertisement in newspapers and TV that it is having a mileage of 87 kilometers per liter. The price paid was Rs.42,691/-. It was found that initially the vehicle was having only a mileage of 63 kms and subsequently decreased to 40 km per liter. It also developed starting trouble, and had to be repaired several times. The starting trouble and deteriorating mileage could not be rectified and he has sought for replacement of the vehicle with compensation and costs. 3. The opposite parties had denied that they have issued such advertisement. It is contended that the mileage would contend upon the quality of riding the vehicle, the load, the quality of the fuel used and other riding conditions. It is asserted that there is no manufacturing defect. They have volunteered to effect any repair and rectify the defects. 4. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PWs 1 &2, Exts P1 to P10 and C1. 5. It is seen that the vehicle was purchased in March 2005. At the time when the expert commissioner examined the vehicle it had run approximately 30000 kms. Further the odometer was static and it is likely thatthe vehicle might have run more. In the above circumstances, the Forum has ordered the opposite parties to replace free of charge the starting coil, the Carburetor exhaust, the piston and odometer. It is about 3 ½ years since the date of purchase and so long the complainant was using the vehicle. Hence it would not be proper order to replace the vehicle, which would result in unjust enrichment. We find that there is no patent illegality in the order. We find that there is no scope for admitting the appeal. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed in limine. Office is directed to forward the copy of this order to the Forum urgently. The LCR received will be sent back to the Forum along with this order. JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT VALSALA SARANGADHARAN -- MEMBER M.K.ABDULLA SONA -- MEMBER
......................JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU | | 
