DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR,
KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. _162_ OF ___2016
DATE OF FILING : 28.12.2016 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: _6.7.2018_
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member(s) : Subrata Sarker & Jhunu Prasad
COMPLAINANT : Dr. Ear Ali Mallick, s/o late Tarachand Mallick of Vivekananda Pally, P.O & P.S Sonarpur, Kolkata-150.
O.P/O.Ps : 1. Sonarpur Gas Service (Distributor), Code. No.99192089, at Haridhan Chakraborty Sarani, P.S Sonarpur, Kolkata-150.
2. The Area Manager, Indane Area Office, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 2, Gariahat Road (South), Dhakuria, Kolkata-68.
3. The Chief Area Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 34A, Nirmal Chandra Street, Kolkata – 13.
_______________________________________________________________________
J U D G M E N T
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
A superannuated senior citizen, the complainant of 68 years old and also a Homeopathic Physician , has approached this Forum with an allegation of harassment and mental agony caused to him by the O.P-1 through non-delivery of LPG for a period of more than two months. The facts leading to the filing of the instant case are epitomized as follows:
The complainant is a consumer of domestic LPG connection from the distributor i.e O.P-1 since December, 2012 and has been enjoying facility of double cylinders. On 12.6.2016 he booked one cylinder and the booking was also confirmed by O.P-1. But no cylinder was supplied to him, even after expiry of a period of two months from the date of booking. The complainant has met the O.P-1 several times and has requested him to ensure delivery of the cylinder to him. But the O.P-1 has paid no heed to the request of the complainant. Therefore, the complainant was compelled to lodge complaint before the O.P nos. 2 and 3 i.e the Officers of Indian Oil Corporation, but still now, his grievance has remained unresolved and, therefore, he has filed the instant case before the Forum, praying for ensuring supply of Gas cylinder and payment of compensation etc. Hence, this case.
The O.P nos. 2 and 3 entered into appearance in this case; but no written version of their statement is filed herein and, therefore, the case is proceeded exparte against them.
The OI.P-1 has been contesting the case by filing written version of his statements ,wherein it is contended inter alia that the complainant is a customer under him having connection no. 17980. According to him, a new branch of the Corporation has been opened at Patuli for convenience of the complainant and ,therefore, it is the IOC which has transferred some of the customers to Patuli Branch on 14.6.2016 i.e only two days after the booking of the gas cylinder by the complainant. The complainant lodged complaint before the O.P nos. 2 and 3 and the O.P nos. 2 and 3 have again transferred the gas connection of the complainant to O.P-1. But the complainant refused to accept delivery of the cylinder and, therefore, the delivery men of O.P-1 came back with cylinder. This O.P has no deficiency in service and, therefore, the complaint should be dismissed in limini with cost.
Upon the averments of the parties following points are formulated for consideration.
POINT FOR DETERMINATION
- Is the case maintainable in Law against the O.Ps?
- Is the distributor i.e O.P-1 liable for deficiency in service for not delivering the gas cylinder to the complainant over a considerable period of time ?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for ?
EVIDENCE OF THE PARTIES
Both the parties have filed evidence in chief. Questionnaires and replies are filed which are kept in the record for consideration. No BNA is filed by either of the parties.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no.1 , 2 & 3 :
Already heard the submissions of the Ld. Lawyers , appearing for both the parties. Perused the complaint, written version filed by the O.P-1 and also the materials on record.
It is the version of the distributor i.e the O.P-1 that the gas cylinder was booked by the complainant on 12.6.2016 . But to him, an order was passed by the IOC and thereby the said Corporation transferred the names of some of the customers from him to newly established distributor at Patuli and, therefore, it has not been possible for O.P-1 to ensure delivery of gas cylinder to the complainant within two days of booking of the gas cylinder. It is the further case of the O.P-1 that the complainant lodged complaint before the IOC and the IOC again transferred the connection of the complainant from Patuli to Sonarpur i.e to O.P-1 and O.P-1 thereafter made attempt to ensure delivery of gas cylinder to the complainant .But the complainant refused to accept the delivery of the cylinder. Now to see, how much truth is there in the version of the O.P-1.
According to O.P-1 he did not transfer the gas cylinder of the complainant to Patuli, but it is none but IOC who has transferred the said gas connection to Patuli . O.P-1 could have produced the said order of the IOC before the Forum to establish the truth of his version. But he has not been able to produce any such order before the Forum. Again, it is the version of O.P-1 that the IOC transferred the said gas connection again from Patuli to Sonarpur when complaint was lodged by the complainant before it. O.P-1 could have produced the copy of said order before the Forum. But that order is not also produced before the Forum. On the other hand, the fact remains that the complainant has not availed of the delivery of gas cylinder even though more than two months has expired. He has undoubtedly suffered harassment and inconvenience in the maintenance of his family. As O.P-1 has not been able produce any order of IOC before the Forum, we feel constrained to say that whatever is stated by the O.P-1 is nothing but a cock and bull story, orchestrated with a view to covering up its own laches. O.P-1 deliberately caused delay in delivery of the gas cylinder to the complainant for the reasons best known to him. This inordinate delay in delivery of gas cylinder to the complainant is undoubtedly an act of deficiency in service on the part of the O.P-1 and O.P-1 will have to pay compensation to the complainant for harassment and mental agony caused to him by unscrupulous act of O.P-1.
Now to see whether the case is maintainable against the O.P nos. 2 and 3 i.e the officers of IOC. Clause 7 of Memorandum of Agreement between the IOC and distributor ( In standard form) provides that in all contracts or engagements entered into by the distributor with the customers for sale of LPG etc. ,the distributor shall act and shall always be deemed to have acted as a principal and not as an agent and the Corporation will not be liable in any way for any act or omission on the part of the distributor. The above provision is provided in Standard Form and is followed in case of every agreement concluded between the distributor and the Corporation i.e IOC. In view of the aforesaid provision of the Standard Form Agreement, the distributor acts as the principal and not as the agent of IOC and ,therefore, it is distributor alone who is responsible for any act or omission. IOC cannot be held liable. This being the legal position, this case appears to be not maintainable against the O.P nos. 2 and 3 i.e the Officers of IOC.
Point nos. 1, 2 & 3 are thus answered in favour of the complainant.
In the result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is decreed on contest against the O.P-1 with a cost of Rs.5000/- and dismissed exparte against the O.P nos. 2 and 3 without cost.
The O.P-1 is directed to supply gas cylinder to the complainant and also to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- out of which he would pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant for harassment and mental agony caused to him and the balance amount of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Fund of this Forum, within a month of this order, failing which, the compensation amount and the cost amount will bear interest @10% p.a till full realization thereof.
Let a free copy of this order be given to the parties concerned at once.
President
I / We agree
Member Member
Dictated and corrected by me
President
T
