BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT PUDUCHERRY
THURSDAY, the 19th day of September, 2013
CONSUMER COMPLAIANT NO.2/2013
P.Dharmaraj, S/o Palani,
43 years, No.172, Govindaraj Naicker Street,
Kosapalayam, Puducherry. …………. Complainant
Vs.
1. M/s Kun Hyundai (Show Room),
Kun Auto Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory.
Murungapakkam, Puducherry -4.
2. M/s Kun Hyundai (Service),
Kun Auto Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory.
Murungapakkam, Puducherry-4.
3. M/s Hyundai Motor India Limited,
(Marketing & Sales) rep. by its
Authorised Signatory, V and VI Floor,
Corporate One (Baani Building),
MIDC Shiravane, Nerul, Plot No.5,
Commercial Centre, Jasola,
New Delhi.
4. M/s Hyundai Motor India Limited
(Regional Office), Rep by its
Authorised Signatory,
NP 54, Developed Plot,
Thiru.Vi.Ka. Industrial Estate,
Ekkaduthangal, Guindy, Chennai-32
5. M/s Hyundai Motor India Limited,
(Regd. Office & Factory), Rep. by its
Authorised Signatory, Irugattukottai,
NH-4, Sriperumpudur Taluk,
Kanchipuram District, Tamilnadu. …………. Opposite Parties
BEFORE:
HON’BLE THIRU JUSTICE K.MOHANRAM,
PRESIDENT
TMT. K.K.RITHA,
MEMBER
THIRU K.ELUMALAI,
MEMBER
FOR THE COMPLAINANT:
Thiru.S.Savariram,
Advocate, Puducherry.
FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:
Thiru K.Krishnamoorthy,
Advocate, Puducherry - For O.P.s 1 & 2
Thiru William Jerome Vincent,
Advocate, Puducherry - For O.Ps 3 to 5
O R D E R
This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite parties directing them to take back the car bearing Regn.No.PY-01/E-1001 (now under the custody of O.P.No.2) and return its cost of Rs.8,58,627/- with interest at 12% p.a. or in the alternative to replace the same with a brand new car of the same model; directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- towards compensation for hardship, mental agony, etc.; directing the opposite parties to discontinue the unfair trade practice and for costs of Rs.25,000/-.
2. On having admitted the complaint to file, notices were ordered to all the opposite parties. The opposite parties have entered appearance through their respective counsel and the matter stands posted for filing reply version by opposite parties.
3. On 14.06.2013, when the matter was called for filing reply version of opposite parties, the complainant and the 1st opposite party have filed a joint compromise memo. Since the post of President, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Puducherry was vacant, the matter stands adjourned without recording the joint memo of compromise filed by the parties.
4. To-day, this complaint is called. Since the complainant and 1st opposite party have entered into a compromise and the terms of which have been reduced into writing, the above complaint is disposed of in terms of the joint memo of compromise dated 25.04.2013 and filed on 14.06.2013. The joint memo of compromise shall form part of this order.
Dated this the 19th day of September, 2013.
(Justice K.MOHAN RAM)
PRESIDENT
(K.K.RITHA)
MEMBER
(K.ELUMALAI)
MEMBER
