ORDER
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (President)
1. Opposite party No.1 manufacturer of the vehicle in question is the petitioner before us. First respondent was the complainant before the District forum and the second respondent is the dealer of the vehicle. complaint was that the purchase of the vehicle by the complainant was on representation that it will run 24 kilometres in one litre of petrol. this was not to be so. It could run only for 12 kilometres. Complainant thus alleged deficiency in service. Complainant went to district Forum praying for refund of the amount of Rs. 67,320/- being price of the auto. After considering the whole aspect of the matter, District Forum allowed the complaint and directed refund of the amount of Rs. 67,320/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of purchase of vehicle till realisation. Complaint was also awarded cost of Rs. 600/-.
2. Both the opposite party-the manufacture and the dealer filed appeal before the State Commission which upheld the order of the District Forum. Only the manufacturer has come before us. In the circumstances of this case, we do not find it is a fit case for us to exercise our jurisdiction under clause (b) of Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act. This revision petition is dismissed.