IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR Present: Sri.K.Gopalan: President Smt.K.P.Prethakumari: Member Smt.M.D.Jessy: Member Dated this, the 7th day of October 2009 C.C.No.96/2009 P.Karunakaran, Panikkarayil House, Complainant P.O.Andalure, P.O.Palayad,Thalassery. 1. Managing Director, Kerala State Co.op.Consumer Federation, Opposite parties Gandhi Nagar, Kochi 2. Secretary, Dharmadam Service co.op.Bank, P.O.Palayad O R D E R Sri.K.Gopalan, President This is a complaint filed under section12 of the consumer protection Act for getting an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.6750/- with compensation of Rs.2000/-. As per the averments in the complaint the complainant has taken gas connection from 2nnd opposite party. The distribution of gas connection is a joint effort of all the opposite parties. Complainant paid Rs.5750/- at the time of taking the connection. After sometime the gas distribution became irregular. Because of the interruption in supply of gas the complainant surrendered the equipment before the 2nd opposite party. Security deposit and the connection charges were collected by2nd opposite party on behalf of 1st opposite party hence both the opposite parties are liable to pay the amount. Hence this complaint. After receiving the complaint, Forum sent notice to both sides. Both parties did not enter appearance but 1st opposite party filed version. 1st opposite party, Consumer fed filed version contending that the complaint is not maintainable since it is hit by section 69 of Kerala co.op.Socieites Act. The difficulties and hurdles that had been faced by the consumer fed have been elaborately discussed in version filed by1st opposite party. It is admitted that at the time of giving gas connection complainant has paid Rs.5750/-. But contended that the claim for refund is not allowable. On the above pleadings the following issues were framed 1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of the opposite parties? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the remedy as prayed in the complaint? 3. Relief and cost. The evidence consists of Exts.A1 marked on the side of the complainant. Issue Nos. 1 to 3 It is admitted that the complainant has paid Rs.5750/- at the time when the LPG connection was taken. . It can be seen that at first instance cooking gas was regularly supplied. But supply of gas subsequently becomes irregular. It is true that the opposite parties failed to supply gas uninterruptedly. When gas is not available there is no use in keeping the equipments and under such circumstances if complainant happened to surrender the connection he cannot be blamed. Ext.A1 reveals that the complainant has surrendered the equipments to 2nd opposite party. The complainant asked the opposite parties to refund the amount that he has paid at the time of availing the gas connection but 2nd opposite party did not make payment. It is the duty of the opposite parties to refund the amount at the time of surrendering the equipments. Ext.A1 shows that the complaint has surrendered the cylinders and regulator to 2nd opposite party. Thus there is clear deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. The complainant is entitled to get the amount Rs.5750/- refunded. The issue Nos. 1 to 3 partly found in favour of complainant. In the result, complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.5750/-(Rupees Five thousand Seven hundred and fifty only) to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is allowed to execute the order against the opposite parties under the provisions of consumer protection Act. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1.Copy of the receipt dt.4.3.09 issued by OP Exhibits for the opposite parties; Nil Witness examined for either side; Nil /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consuemr Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur
......................GOPALAN.K
......................PREETHAKUMARI.K.P | | 
