RSA 88/2019

Page 1 of 22

$~A-7

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of decision: 22.04.2021

+

RSA 88/2019 and CM No.19306/2019

HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LTD. & ANR. ……APPELLANTS

Through

Mr. Manish Shrivastava,

Mr. Rijul Taneja, Mr. Rahul Gupta

and Mr.Varun Chopra, Advocates

Versus

DR. T.N. GROVER

…..RESPONDENT

Through

Mr. Sanjay Agnihotri, Advocate

and

Mr.

Sandeep

Choudhary,

Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

JYOTI SINGH, J. (Oral)

1.

Present Regular Second Appeal has been filed assailing the

judgment dated 28.02.2019 passed by the First Appellate Court whereby

the appeal of the Appellants preferred against the judgment and decree

dated 19.09.2017, was dismissed. Appellants herein were the Defendants

in the suit and Respondent was the Plaintiff.

2.

The facts of the case in a narrow compass are that the

Respondent/Plaintiff purchased a new Hyundai Accent Car bearing

Registration No. DL-9-CH-0668 from M/s. Rama Motors Pvt. Ltd., a

registered dealer. At the time when the car was purchased,

RSA 88/2019

Page 2 of 22

Appellants/Defendants were conducting a „World Cup Contest‟ as a part

of their Sales Promotion Scheme. Under the Scheme, all those who

purchased any Hyundai Model Car, during the specified period, could

participate in the contest. The details of the contest and the various prizes

were published in widely circulated newspapers for the benefit of the

general public on 13.06.2002. According to the Scheme, the following

prizes were to be awarded to the winners of the contest :-

3.

Respondent/Plaintiff participated in the contest and filled up the

necessary entry forms while purchasing the vehicle. He thereafter

received a letter dated 14.08.2002 from the Appellants/Defendants

informing him that he had won the third prize in the contest which was

concluded on 08.08.2002 albeit the weight of the gold coin was

mentioned as 5 Grams as against the weight of 100 Grams, which was the

third prize as per the publication in the newspapers. He was also

informed that the prize would be sent through direct mailers at the

address of the Respondent/Plaintiff by 31.08.2002. To this extent, the

facts are undisputed between the parties.

4.

Respondent/Plaintiff

sent

a

number

of

letters

to

the

Appellants/Defendants asking them to fulfill their commitment and send

RSA 88/2019

Page 3 of 22

the third prize, but there was no response. A legal notice dated

10.10.2003 was sent to the Appellants/Defendants and in their reply dated

27.11.2003,

Appellants/Defendants

took

a

stand

that

the

Respondent/Plaintiff had won the fourth prize, i.e., 5 Grams gold coin

and mention of Third prize in the letter dated 14.08.2002 was an error. It

was also stated that the error was rectified immediately and a

corrigendum letter dated 16.08.2002 was sent.

5.

Failing to receive the prize, Respondent/Plaintiff filed a suit

seeking mandatory injunction directing the Appellants/Defendants to

deliver 100 Grams Sonata gold coin being the third prize of the contest.

Written Statement was filed by Appellants/Defendants and the suit was

primarily contested on the ground that Respondent/Plaintiff had won

fourth prize and was entitled to 5 Grams gold coin and not 100 Grams

Sonata gold coin. Plea taken was that there was a typographical error in

the letter dated 14.08.2002 and therefore, a corrigendum dated

16.08.2002 was sent to the Respondent/Plaintiff, clarifying the position

since the contest was conducted by independent agency M/s. Quantum

Direct India Private Limited through a computerized draw of lots on

08.08.2002. Replication was filed to the written statement, wherein, the

Respondent/Plaintiff categorically denied receipt of letter dated

16.08.2002 and pleaded that the said letter was forged and fabricated to

defeat the rightful claim of the Respondent/Plaintiff to the third prize.

6.

Learned Tria