FIAT INDIA PVT LIMITED vs S K VERMA

-COMPLAINANT S. K. Verma had purchased a Palio car from M/s. Vivek Automobiles, New Delhi on 14. 3. 2003. The complainant alleged that M/s. FIAT India had claimed that Palio car will give an average fuel consumption of 13 to 15 kilometres per litre (kmpl) with A/c and 15 to 18 KMPL without A/c. The complainant was extremely unhappy with the kilometrage right from the beginning as the car was giving only 10 kmpl with A/c. This was brought to the notice of the dealer of the time of free service and subsequently on several occasions from 25. 5. 2002. He made further written representations to opposite party No. 1 i. e. , FIAT India Pvt. Ltd. on 4. 3. 2003, 12. 4. 2003 and 7. 5. 2003. As he did not get any positive response he filed a complaint claiming replacement of a car or refund of the cost of the car with the compensation of Rs. 5,000 towards mental agony. This was contested by the opposite parties stating that fuel average is solely dependent upon various umpteen operational facts such as driving habits, fuel used, road conditions, maintenance of car, etc. and no manufacturer in the world can guarantee a specific fuel consumption.

VARIOUS job cards also indicate about the complaint made of low average. Joint road kilometrage test was conducted on 1. 4. 2004 during which the car was driven for 207 km which gave an average of 11. 3 kmpl. The complainant alleged that this average is less than 20 km as per the printed material of the opposite party and 14. 4 km as claimed by the company in an advertisement in a newspaper. The District Forum after hearing the parties on going through the records of the case directed for replacing the old car with a new one of the same model with fresh warranty along with Rs. 10,000 as compensation and Rs. 2,000 as costs. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum the opposite parties FIAT India and Vivek Automobiles filed appeals before the State Commission. The State Commission heard the parties and passed detailed judgment partly allowing the appeal by directing the manufacturer to refund the cost of the car as the ultimate liability rests on the manufacturer. However, no interest was awarded maintaining the rest of the order.

Dissatisfied with the order of the State Commission FIAT India has filed this revision. We heard the learned Counsel for FIAT India for the petitioner at the time of admission. He urged that the kilometrage claimed by the complainant can be obtained under ideal road conditions not when a road test is conducted in a busy urban area wherein there are several red lights. Ideal mileage (kilometrage) can be obtained only on first class highways.

LEARNED Counsel further submitted that copy of the encyclopedia was handed over to the complainant when he had filed the complaint and this encyclopedia of fuel efficiency gives several driving tips to maximise fuel efficiency. It also mentions about the method of evaluation of fuel consumption for automotive vehicles. There is no proof that complainant has followed these guidelines. It is worthwhile going through a letter dated March 4, 2003. the complainant has address this letter to CMD, FIAT India Pvt. Ltd. complaining against the fuel efficiency of the Palio Car. On 28. 3. 2003 when the car was repaired the complainant had taken delivery of the car mentioning that the fuel consumption is subject to check. The petitioner has also filed photostat copies of two advertisements. In one, it is mentioned that Fiat Palio body coloured bumber, A/c with heater, tinted glasses 14. 4 kmpl wherein 14. 4 kmpl is written in bold letters. Names of five authorised dealer are mentioned in which Vivek Automobiles finds a place. This means the car will give 14. 4 KMPL when A/c is used. Similarly, there is another advertisement which boldly says ''less on price high on mileage''. As these were filed by the petitioner himself through his Counsel these are not disputed.

IN this connection, it is relevant to quote the decision rendered by this Commission in Revision Petition No. 633/2005, Bajaj Auto Ltd. and Anr. v. Pankaj Kumar, IV (2006) CPJ 267 (NC), wherein it was held that: "the short point to be decided in this case is about the kmpl given by Kawasaki Bajaj Boxer CT Motorcycle. We have perused the advertisements which are produced before us including the advertisement which is in Hindi, translated in English. The advertisement proclaims that ''if it is your dream to secure 87 kmpl on an average then buy Boxer C. T. Motorcycle''. There are other advertisements where it is written ''87 km/pl. 0% interest, last two days, scheme closes, hurry up,'' etc. "

The District Forum discussed this case in great details. It is stated that vehicle in question gave mileage of 75 kmpl when it was driven by staff of the dealer while it gave an average of 65 kmpl when the same was driven by the respondent. Even assuming that the vehicle gave 75 km/pl. , 87 kmpl is still an exaggerated claim made by the petitioners through various advertisements alluring and inviting the gullible consumer to buy the vehicle emanating to an unfair trade practice. Only in one of the advertisements it is mentioned that the vehicle has to be driven in ideal condition, but this is in small print. It is nowhere clarified as to what is an ''ideal condition''. This Commission''s order dated 14. 12. 2001 in O. P. No. 66 of 1992, Tata Chemicals Ltd. v. Skypak Couriers Pvt. Ltd. , II (2002) CPJ 24 (NC), has discussed in great details the validity or otherwise of small and fine prints. "hence, we do not find any factual or legal infirmity in the order passed by lower Fora. Accordingly, revision petition is dismissed. " The ratio of the above decision is squarely applicable to this csae. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost. R. P. dismissed.