The complainant/respondent no. 1, namely, Shri N.K. Paliwal purchased Ford Fiesta (Diesel) car from M/s. A.B. Motors Private Limited, Dehradun on 20.06.2007.  The aforesaid car is manufactured by the petitioner before this Commission, namely, Ford India Private Limited and was marketed by M/s. A.B. Motors Privated Limited.  In Dehradun the aforesaid vehicle was sold by M/s. Bhagat Ford, c/o A.B. Motors Private Limited, Dehradun.  Claiming that the Opposite Party No. 4 had published advertisement in newspapers claiming average 31.4 km/litre for the aforesaid car, whereas the actual mileage was 15 – 16 km/litre, a complaint was filed before the District Forum at Dehradun seeking the following relief:-

“(a)    this Hon’ble Forum may kindly direct the respondents to give another car of the same model, giving average of 31 kilometer per liter in exchange of the car mentioned in this complaint.  If it is not so possible then in the alternative, the respondents may pay back the cost of the aforesaid car amounting to ₹7,43,200/- to the complainant.

(b)     a sum of ₹50,000/- may be awarded as damages to the complainant against the respondents towards mental agony.

(c)      the cost of this complaint may also be awarded to the complainant and against the respondents.

(d)     any other relief, which this Hon’ble Forum deems fit in the circumstances of this case may also be awarded to the complainant.”

2.       The complaint was resisted by the petitioner before this Commission, interalia on the grounds that no representation claiming average 31.4 km / litre was ever made by the petitioner company.  It was further alleged that the relationship between the manufacturer and its dealer was strictly on a principal to principal basis.  It was also claimed that the mileage with respect to the vehicle was tested by independent agency and was subject to certain test conditions.

3.       The District Forum vide its order dated 15.05.2009, directed the opposite parties including the petitioner before this Commission to make a payment of Rs.7,43,200/- to the complainant.  It was further directed that on the aforesaid deposit, the complainant would bring the vehicle in question and hand over the same to the opposite parties.  A sum of Rs.10,000/- was also awarded to the complainant as cost of litigation.

4.       Being aggrieved from the order of the District Forum the petitioner approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal.  The other opposite party M/s. A.B. Motors Private Limited and M/s. Bhagat Ford, however, did not challenge the order of the District Forum.  The said appeal having been dismissed the petitioner is before this Commission by way of this revision petition.

5.       As noted earlier, the case of the complainant has been that pursuant to the advertisement issued by the car dealer claiming that the car in question had average of 31.4 km / litre, he purchased the vehicle by way of a demand draft dated 09.03.2007.  It would mean that the advertisement claiming average of 31.4 km / litre would have been read by him prior to 09.03.2007.  However, the complaint is conspicuously silent as regards the date of the alleged advertisement.  Nowhere, it is alleged in the complaint that an advertisement before 09.03.2007 was given by the dealer of the car claiming average of 31.4 km / litre.

6.       I have perused the order passed by the District Forum as well as the order of the State Commission.  Neither the District Forum nor the State Commission has even adverted to any advertisement prior to 09.03.2007.  The earliest advertisement refer by them was of 20.06.2007.  Obviously, the advertisement dated 20.06.2007 could not have influenced the decision of the complainant to purchase a vehicle in March 2007.  Thus, the complainant failed to establish any representation to him either by the manufacturer or by its authorised dealer, prior to 09.03.2007 and claiming average of 31.4 km/ litre.  Consequently, it cannot be said that the petitioner company having represented to the complainant that the car in question would be giving average 31.4 km/litre had failed to deliver on the said promise.

9.       For the reasons stated hereinabove, the orders passed by the District Forum and State Commission to the extent they pertain to the petitioner company are hereby set aside and the complaint to the extent it pertains to the petitioner Ford India Private Limited is hereby dismissed.