THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSEL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA AT MUMBAI CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO: SC/27/CC/14/430 Shri Sameer S Kartha Residing at A-404, Vasai Manor, Babhola Chulna Road, Vasai West, Thane 401202 ….Complainant Versus

1. Hyundai Motor India Limited Registered Office at Irrugattukottal, NH No.4, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kanchipuram District, Tamil Nadu 602117.

And having its place of business at Business Square, A/102, First Floor, Chakula, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai 400 093.

2. Modi Motors Agencies Private limited Authorized Agent of Hyundai Motor India Limited.

Plot No.223, Ground Floor, Modi House, Opp L.I.C Building, Naupada, Eastern Express High way, Thane- 400602. ….Opposite Parties.

BEFORE:

Ms. Poonam V. Maharshi, Hon’ble Presiding Member.

Dr. Nisha Amol Chavhan, Hon’ble Member APPEARANCE :

For Complainant : Adv. Akshada Deshpande For Opposite Party No.1: Adv. Shamin F.

For Opposite Party No.2: None

O R D E R

(Delivered on 10/03/2026)

Per Mrs. Dr. Nisha Amol Chavhan, Member

1. The present Consumer Complaint No. CC/430/2014 in is filed under Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act-1986. (The ‘C.P. Act’ for short) by the Complainant against Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2. The brief facts of the case of Complainant stated that, the Complainant is a General Manager of Sales and Marketing, for the purpose of sales, the Complainant has to travel a lot so, he decided to buy a good, sturdy, fuel efficient and safe car.

2. Case of the Complainant that, on 21/01/2012, he purchased a HYUNDAI FLUIDIC VERNA (Diesel) Car from the Opponent No.2, an agent of the Opposite Party No.1, manufactured by the Opposite Party No.1 at a price of Rs.10,19,603/- including charges for registration and insurance. That is total amount of Rs. 12,50,000/-. The Warranty of the Car was for 2 years. The Car was delivered to the Complainant on 06/02/2012 and was registered with the RTO Thane bearing No.MH-48-A-3997 on 08/02/2012.

3. Complainant stated that, the 1^st and 2^nd free services of the Car were carried out on 28^th February, 2012 at 1023 Kms. and on 30^th August, 2012 at 10179 Kms. respectively at the Opposite Party No.1's Authorized Service Station. After servicing, within few months after using the Car, the Complainant faced problems pertaining to the poor mileage. The Opposite Party No.2 neglected his complaints of poor mileage and returned the Car after regular service.

4. Complainant stated that, on 10^th June, 2013, the Complainant found that the gear lever was locked in reverse position and he was not able to shift to other positions any more. On observation, the Complainant found that the clutch pedal was remaining depressed and not moving up after releasing the same. He lifted the clutch pedal by hand and immediately drove the Car to the Opposite Party No.2's Service Centre. The Car was attended by one Mr. Sapnil, Adviser and he recommended replacement of the master cylinder on clutch mechanism because it had a manufacturing defect. The master cylinder was replaced free of charge, as this was a manufacturing defect and the car was under warranty. The Complainant was surprised that a new car manufactured by a company which is having lot of quality checks and certificates, was having this kind of a manufacturing defect.

5. Complainant further stated that, the same problem again started after the Car ran for a few Kms. and the gear shifting again became very hard. On 27^th August, 2013 the Complainant therefore took the Car to the Opposite Party No.2 who kept the Car for a day and returned it after some repairs. Thereafter, again on 10^th September, 2013, the Complainant noticed the defects in the Car i.e. handbrake was not working properly, Belt was making noise; and Poor Mileage was continuing. The Car was returned back after doing some lubrication and without attending to the above defects and as such, the same problems arose after a few Kms.

6. Meanwhile, the 2 year warranty of the Car expired on 8^th.February, 2014. After 2 months expiry of t