IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 24.02.2015 Date of Hearing: 29.05.2024 Date of Decision: 02.09.2024 FIRST APPEAL NO.-101/2015 IN THE MATTER OF MR. VIMAL SHARMA R/O FLAT NO. 71, SHARDA APPARTMENTS, WEST ENCLAVE PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI-110034 (Through: Mr. Kapil Chawla, Advocate)

…Appellant VERSUS

1. SUHRIT HYUNDAI, SUHRIT SERVICE PVT. LTD.

C-97, MAYAPURI INDUSTRIAL AREA, NEW DELHI- 110064 …Respondent no.1

2. HYUNDAI MOTORS LTD., CUSTOMERS RELATIONS OFFICE, REGIONAL OFFICE, A-30, MOHAN COOPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, MATHURA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110044

3. HYUNDAI MOTORS INDIA LTD., HEAD OFFICE, PLOT NO. H-

1, SITCOT INDUSTRIAL PARK, ILIGUNGALIUKOLLAI, SRIPERUMBUDUR, …Respondent no. 2&3 CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU-602105.

CORAM HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MR. J.P. AGRAWAL, MEMBER (GENERAL)

Present: None for the parties.

PER:HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL,PRESIDENT

JUDGMENT

1. The facts of the case as per the District Commission record are as under:

“That the respondents had given an advertisement in the Times of India newspaper on 22/12/08 in fashion and style of Docamber Double Jackpot pouring the public to buy a Hyundai Santro car GL (AC+ Power steering) at 10 years old price of Rs.2.99 Lakh along with other attractive offers as mentioned in the advertisement). In this advertisement it is interalia stated that the buyers will got (free Insurance + Accessories worth Rs.15000 +Exchange discount of Rs.7500, Total savings Rs.33173 +Full excise benefit etc.

That the complainant got impressed by this lucrative offer and made up his mind to accept this offer and thereafter the complainant approached the Respondent No. 1 who are one of the authorized dealer of Hyundai.

That the complainant deposited with the respondent no. 1 an amount of Rs.3.32 Lakh (Rs 2.00 Lacs By Cheque vide receipt no. 2677 dated 29-12- 2008 and Rs 1,32,000/- by cash vide receipt no. 2152 dated 30-12-2008). Copies of both these receipts given by the respondent no. 1.

That at the time of depositing the aforesaid amount the respondent no. 1 assured the complainant that the Santro car for which the above mentioned amount has been received by them would be delivered to the complainant on or before 31/01/09, but this assurance had gone in vain. Complainant was however told to wait till 10/02/09, when the car will be definitely be delivered to the complainant.

That on 10/02/09 the complainant again visited the office of the respondent no. 1 to take the delivery of the said car but was shocked to know that the respondent no. 1 has closed its Mayapuri Showroom and nobody was there to tell the actual situation. The complainant had therefore lodged a complaint with the police station Mayapuri on 10-02-2009 to take necessary action against the respondent in this matter as the complainant Has Been cheated the receipt under Rubber Stamp of the Police Station.

That the complainant approached Respondent No. 3 (Head Office of Hyundai Motors India Ltd.) as well as Respondent No. 2 (Customers Relation Office of the respondents, situated at A-30 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi) and had sent to them several Emails including the E mail dated 27/03/09 (Copy of Email is annexed as Annexure-C3to this complaint. The complainant was told that necessary action will be taken in the matter within 3 Working days but no action was taken by the respondents. That the complainant made no of calls on customer care no. 1800114645 and registered several complaints regarding the said conduct of he dealer and customer relation department but no one bothered about it.

That the complainant received a letter dated 8-06-2009 from the respondent informing the complainant that they will not pay the interest at all nor they will refund the money unless the complainant withdrew the complaint lodged against the respondent.

That the complainant had sent the Legal notices dated 23-05-2009 and 30/04/09 to the respondent through his advo