SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 7860

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
B.M Hyundai B.M. Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd. & another – Appellant
Versus
Smt. Shamim Beghum – Respondent
SC/5/A/171/2018



Petitioner Advocates:Mr. Sahil Gulati ,Respondent Advocate: Mr. S.K. Gupta

AND Appeal No.

M/s B.M. Hyundai & Anr.

171 of 2018 Vs.

Smt. Shamim Begum STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND, DEHRADUN Date of Institution: 15.11.2018 Date of Final Hearing: 16.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 First Appeal No. 170 / 2018 Smt. Shamim Begum W/o Mohd. Yusuf R/o Sona House, 73 Turner Road, Dehradun (Through: Sh. S.K. Gupta, Advocate)

…..Appellant VERSUS

1. B.M. Hyundai, B.M. Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd.

Regd. Office 100-A, Rajpur Road, Dehradun

2. B.M. Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd.

Mohobewala, Saharanpur Road, Dehradun (Through: Sh. Sahil Gulati, Advocate)

…..Respondents AND Date of Institution: 19.11.2018 Date of Final Hearing: 16.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 First Appeal No. 171 / 2018

1. M/s B.M. Hyundai, B.M. Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd.

100-A Rajpur Road, Dehradun

2. M/s B.M. Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd.

Mobbewala, Saharanpur Road, Dehradun (Through: Sh. Sahil Gulati, Advocate)

….Appellants AND Appeal No.

M/s B.M. Hyundai & Anr.

171 of 2018 Vs.

Smt. Shamim Begum Vs.

Smt. Shamim Begum W/o Mohd. Yusuf R/o 73, Turner Road, Dehradun (Through: Sh. S.K. Gupta, Advocate)

…..Respondent Coram:

Ms. Kumkum Rani, President Mr. C.M. Singh, Member

ORDER

(Per: Ms. Kumkum Rani, President):

Both the appeals under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 have been directed against the judgment and order dated 15.10.2018 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dehradun (hereinafter to be referred as the District Commission) in consumer complaint No. 256 of 2013 styled as Smt. Shamim Begum Vs. B.M. Hyundai Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd. and anr., wherein and whereby the complaint was allowed.

2. As both the appeals have arisen from the same judgment and order dated 15.10.2018, therefore, it is just, proper and appropriate to decide them together for the sake of convenience.

3. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, in brief, are as such that the complainant booked a Hyundai Elantra Car from the opposite party No. 2 – B.M. Auto Sales Pvt. Ltd. on 17.12.2012 after depositing Rs. 20,000/-. The car model booked was New Elantra, Variant-CRDI, 1.6 Color-Red, manufacturing year 2012, ex-showroom price was Rs. 15,08,101/-. The AND Appeal No.

M/s B.M. Hyundai & Anr.

171 of 2018 Vs.

Smt. Shamim Begum insurance amount of Rs. 35,663/- and also purchased GPS worth Rs. 10,000/- RTO registration charges being Rs. 78,770/- amounting to a total of Rs. 16,22,535/-. The complainant paid Rs. 3,97,000/- through cheque as well as rest amount to the tune of Rs. 12,35,000/- was paid to the opposite parties after taking finance from PNB Bank. The subject vehicle was insured with the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., NCR Plaza, New Cantt Road, Dehradun which was valid from 01.01.2013 to 31.12.2013. The complainant also got delivery of the subject vehicle on 01.01.2013 at about 4.40pm. The opposite parties made the delivery of the subject vehicle to the complainant after obtaining the entire consideration amount and procured signature of the complainant in the form No. 20, which was an application for registration of the subject vehicle and the opposite parties have also obtained requisite papers. The opposite parties have received Rs. 78,770/- for getting vehicle insured, therefore, the liability rest on the opposite parties to get the subject vehicle insured from the RTO office. It is further stated that the complainant paid Rs. 3,77,000/- through cheque No. 785401 of Fedral Bank, Dehradun to the B.M. Auto Sales, but due to Manager (sales) of opposite party No. 2 going on leave, the cheque given by the complainant was locked in the drawer of the Manager (sales) and it could not be submitted before the Bank before 22.01.2013. The opposite parties got the above cheque cashed on dated 22.01.2013. After taking / obtaining the registration charges in lump-sum from the complainant, the registration was not done and the complainant contacted the opposite parties at several times, but the registration was not done in time. The PNB bank had requested sever

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top