State Commission has reversed the order of the District Forum directing the manufacturer to replace the vehicle sold to the petitioner with a new one as there was no manufacturing defect.  The petitioner, who is appearing in person, very fairly states that there was no manufacturing defect in the vehicle but there was a misrepresentation based on which the petitioner purchased the car.  The alleged misrepresentation is that as per brochure, the vehicle gave a mileage of 16 Kms/ltr in the city and 18 Kms/ltr on the highway, whereas in actual it gave mileage of 8 Kms/ltr in the city. 

District Forum had ordered replacement of the car with a new one taking the defect pointed out by the petitioner to be manufacturing defects.  State Commission has rightly come to the conclusion that there were no manufacturing defects.  Even the petitioner states that there were no manufacturing defects.  Under the circumstances, the order passed by the District Forum ordering replacement of the vehicle could not be sustained.  State Commission has rightly reversed the order of the District Forum ordering replacement of the vehicle, as there was no manufacturing defect in the vehicle.  Dismissed.