The commission — comprising president Justice Sangita Lal Dhingra and member JP Agarwal — was hearing an appeal against an order of the Delhi district forum order, which, in January 2015, held that the head office of Hyundai Motors India and its customer relation office were not responsible for the breach of commitment by Suhrit Hyundai in Mayapuri.
The forum had, however, directed the authorised dealer to refund the booking amount of Rs 3.32 lakh and pay a litigation cost of Rs 10,000, the commission noted.
The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission further noted that the consumer filed an appeal against the forum’s order, claiming its directions could not be executed as the dealer had closed the showroom and there was no current address.
The consumer appealed that, as a result, Hyundai Motors India Limited, Chennai, and its customer relation office in Mathura Road, Delhi, be held liable.
The commission noted the manufacturer’s submissions that its liability was limited to warranty obligations and it could be held liable for any issues with the retail sales of a vehicle. In an order passed earlier this month, the commission said no manufacturer-dealer agreement was placed on record to establish the manufacturer’s liability. “We note that Rs 3.32 lakh paid by the appellant (consumer) to respondent No 1 (authorised showroom) was for the booking amount and was not transferred to respondent No 2 (head office) and respondent No 3 (customer relation office). As a result, there is no privity of contract and they cannot be held liable,” it said.
The commission dismissed the appeal, saying the manufacturer and its Delhi office could not be held responsible for “any wrongdoing or omission” by the dealer.
