He Filed This With Mala Fide Intention
Bengaluru Consumer Court fined a man Rs 40,000 for filing a misleading complaint about a Hyundai car he had already sold and claimed insurance for. The court called his actions a waste of its precious time.
Thank you for reading this post, don’t forget to subscribe!
KARNATAKA: The Bengaluru Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) came down hard on a man who tried to misuse the system.
The court imposed a fine of Rs 40,000 on the complainant for filing a dishonest and time-wasting consumer complaint regarding his damaged Hyundai car, which he had already sold and also received an insurance claim of Rs 3 lakh for.
ALSO READ: Legal Explainer | How to File a Case in Consumer Court? Step-by-Step Guide
The bench, consisting of President (In-charge) Anita Shivakumar and member Suma Anil Kumar, found that the man had hidden important facts from the court.
He did not tell the commission that he had entered into a legal agreement to sell the damaged car to Trigent Corporate in January 2025.
The commission also noted that the complainant’s lawyer should have guided him better about his rights after selling the vehicle.
The court clearly said:
“They (complainant and his lawyer) are well aware that the car in question is not in their possession to replace or to repair the vehicle. Such being the case complainant filed this complaint with mala fide intention and going to waste the precious time of the court. Hence, it is a fit case to dismiss the complaint as not admissible with cost of Rs.40,000/- which shall be remitted to the consumer welfare fund within 30 days from the date of order. Failing which it carries interest at the rate of 10% per annum till realization (sic).”
The complaint stated that the man had purchased the Hyundai car for Rs 5.22 lakh, along with an extended warranty worth Rs 14,880. In October 2024, the car reportedly suffered a brake failure, and shortly after stopping the vehicle, the bonnet caught fire.
Despite turning off the engine and applying the handbrake, the fire spread quickly, causing heavy damage.
The repair cost was estimated to be around Rs 6.7 lakh. The man claimed that the fire was caused due to a mechanical issue, which, according to him, should have been covered under the extended warranty.
However, he later sold the damaged car to Trigent Corporate for Rs 88,000 and also claimed Rs 3 lakh as compensation from the insurance company. These facts were not disclosed in his complaint, which was meant to seek either repair, replacement, or compensation from Hyundai, its dealer, and its roadside assistance agent.
The commission, after examining the documents and the sale agreement, dismissed the case on May 27, 2025, saying that once the car was sold, the complainant had no legal right over it.
ALSO READ: Consumer Court: “Collection of Parking Fee in Shopping Malls is Unfair Trade Practice”
The commission emphasized:
“It’s general awareness once movable or immovable property sold out, purchaser who purchases the property will have a right on a property not the seller …Complainant have no right over the car in question. As per the document of agreement and the submission complainant has ceased his rights, immediately after car sold out (sic).”
CASE TITLE:
Sri Mohan Hegde v. M/s Hyundai Motors India Limited and ors.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Consumer Courts
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
