(1.) D.Appa Rao Appellant is unsuccessful complainant.
(2.) THE case of the complainants in brief is that the complainant purchased a second hand Indigo Merina car by paying an amount of Rs. 3,15,000/- towards advance of sale consideration from R2 Manager of R1 who deals in sale of new as well as old cars. He requested 10 days time for delivery of vehicle on the ground that there were several encumbrances to be cleared. When he went there he was requested to take another vehicle as the vehicle purchased by him was not available. THEre upon he showed his dis-inclination to purchase another car. THEy have been postponing refund of the amount. On that he got issued a registered notice on 19.11.2007 for which a reply was given with false allegations. THEy were liable to pay the amount with interest. Alleging deficiency in service he claimed refund of Rs. 1,50,000/- together with interest @ 12% p.a., and costs.
(3.) THE Dist. Forum after considering the evidence placed on record opined that the voucher Ex. A1 was signed by one P. Srinivas @ vasu representing R1. It was not a cash receipt issued by R1. At any rate the person who signed in the voucher was terminated from service for mis-managing the funds of the company evidenced from paper publication Ex. A4. THE complainant could not have purchased an old car when the respondent company is an authorised agent for sale of new cars manufactured by Hyundai Company. Mr. Yugandhar, Managing Director was authorised to sign on behalf of the company, and therefore the complainant is not entitled to any amount, and therefore dismissed the complaint.