Date of Filing: 06/01/2016

Date of Order: 08/01/2018

BEFORE THE BANGALORE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE -  27.

Dated: 8^th DAY OF JANUARY  2018

PRESENT

SRI.SYED ANSER KHALEEM, B.Sc., B.Ed., LL.B., PRESIDENT

SRI.H.JANARDHAN,B.A.L, LL.B., MEMBER

SMT.BHARATI.B.VIBHUTE, B.E(I.P.) LL.B., MEMBER

COMPLAINT NO.33/2016

V/s

ORDER

BY SRI.SYED ANSER KHALEEM, PRESIDENT

1.     This is the complaint filed in person U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 alleging the deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and prays for orders to direct the O.Ps entitle to receive the subsidy amount of Rs.1515.22 + subsidy credited if any with interest at 18% till its realization and to pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant.

2.     The brief facts of the complaint are that complainant is a consumer of HP Gas (HPCL) with Consumer No.620550 and customer under the name of distributor is Murali Distributors (O.P.No.1). Further states that on 27.1.2015 the complainant along with Aadhar Card submitted PAHAL (DBTL) SCHE Form to O.P.No.1 and mentioned that the amount of subsidy should be credited to the account No. 0768111034548 maintained in Canara Bank, Marathhalli Branch, Bangalore. Further states that, the complainant received first message (SMS) from DM –HPDBTL stating that LPG subsidy of Rs.308.09 is transferred to account No.XXXXX17 maintained in HDFC Bank. Further states that,  the O.Ps have credited the subsidy amount to an account which was closed years before which was not linked by Aadhaar Card instead of crediting / transferring  to an account which was mandated / authorized by the complainant and the complainant had prolonged correspondence with the O.Ps through various letters and emails in the matter of subsidy amount.  Further states that Rs.1,304.06 has been paid to an account which is closed years before. Further states that O.P.No.2 also admitted that rush and chaotic conditions prevailed at O.P.No.1 and has taken up the issue with the distributor and the distributor has assured to improve upon the same to give hassle free service but O.ps did not resolve the issue. Further states that, the supply of LPG was restored and the subsidy amount for cash memo / refill  No.115758 is now credited to the account authorized or mandated by the complainant, but the issue of subsidy amount of Rs.1,515.22 which was credited to HDFC Bank closed years before is not yet received by the complainant and the issue is not resolved to this date.  Hence this complaint.    

2.     Upon issuance of notice O.P No.1 to 3 and the O.P No.1 appeared through their counsel and filed its version. But O.P.No.2 and 3 were remained absent and consequently proceeded to place exparte.

3.     In the version of O.P.No.1 it is contended that the complainant is a consumer of HP Gas vide consumer No. 620550 and O.P.No.1 is the distributor. Further contended that, complainant submitted bank details along with Aadhar Card and the same was updated and that the direct benefit transfer for LPG consumer (DPTL) is the scheme aimed to improve the subsidy administration of LPG across the country, as per the scheme and LPG consumer will get a cylinder at full market price (excluding VAT) and the differential between the subsidized price and full market price i.e. the subsidy will be transferred to their account. Further contended that, to become eligible for the scheme on LPG consumer has become CTC consumer and to become CTC consumer one has to complete three easy steps one is to receive is /her Aadhaar card, secondly link his/her Aadhar number to LPG consumer number and thirdly link his/her Aadhaar number to bank account and after completing these three steps the CTC consumer will start receiving his/her LPG subsidy directly in their bank account. Further CTC consumers will get advance to buy their first subsidized cylinder after launch of DBTL scheme and non-CTC consumers will get three months to become CTC consumer and during these three months these non-CTC consumers will receive their LPG cylinders at subsidized price  and if they become CTC member during this period  they will start receiving their subsidy  directing in their bank account.  Further after three months the non-CTC consumers will receive the LPG cylinder at full market price and after three months only if the consumer is CTC consumer he/she will receive the LPG cylinder. Further the LPG subsidy will not available for LPG consumers if the consumer or his/her spouse had taxable income of more than Ten lakhs during the previous financial year  from computed as per the Income Tax Act 1961 . Further contended that, in respect of the above,  any disturbance in crediting the subsidy amount  the customer should contact only O.P.No.2 and 3  and O.P.No.1 in no way liable for the same.  Further contended that if there is any deficiency in service then it is from O.P.No.2 and 3 and not O.P.No.1 Further contended that the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas has set of a common call center for any queries  related to LPG subsidy scheme and common call center is established to resolve queries of LPG customers of Indane, HP, and Bharat Gas and the complainant if he has any queries or disturbance he can always opt to contact 1800-300-1947 and get resolve his problem. Further denying all other allegations O.P No.1 prays for dismissal of the complaint.

4.     In order to substantiate the case of the parties and both parties have filed their affidavit evidence and we also heard the arguments.

5.     On the basis of the pleading of the parties, the following points will arise for our consideration is:-

                (A)   Whether the complainant has proved

                         deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?

(B)   Whether the complainant is entitled to

       the relief prayed for in the complaint?

(C)   What order?

6.     Our answers to the above points are:-

POINT (A):       In the Affirmative.

POINT (B):       In the Partly Affirmative.

POINT (C):               As per the final order

for the following:

REASONS

POINT No. (A) & (B):-

7.     On perusal of the rival pleadings of the parties, it is not in dispute that, the complainant is the consumer of H.P Gas (HPCL) with Consumer No.620550 and customer under the name of distributor is Murali Distributors (O.P.No.1).  Further it is not in dispute as per the Government scheme complainant is entitled for the subsidy given by the Government of India. 

8.     The sole allegation of the complaint is that, though the complainant availed the benefit of subsidy amount but the subsidy amount of Rs. 1515.22 credited wrongly to the HDFC bank and the complainant had already long back closed the said account.

9.     Per-contra O.P.No.1 contended that he is only the distributor and as per the requirement the complainant submitted bank details along with Aadhar Card and the same was updated  and that the direct benefit transfer for LPG consumer (DPTL) is the scheme aimed to improve the subsidy administration of LPG across the country, as per the scheme and LPG consumer will get a cylinder at full market price (excluding VAT) and the differential between the subsidized price and full market price i.e. the subsidy will be transferred  to their account. Hence contended that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.No.1 and also contended that O.P.No.2 and 3 are liable.

10.   It is worth to note that O.P.No.2 and 3 though remained absent and placed exparte.  Hence the orders is not automatic, the parties to establish their case independently in the light of evidence. It is worth to note that O.P.No.2 is the Senior Regional Manager for H.P gas and O.P.No.3 is the Deputy Director of Food and Civil Supplies and they are nothing to do with the deposit of subsidized amount as per the Central Government Scheme. Whereas it is the distributor i.e. O.P.No.1 who collects the details of the complainant like bank account number, Aadhar number and it is O.P.No.1’s duty to upload in the system and forward the information to the concerned.  It is not the case of the O.P.No.1 that the complainant has given the HDFC bank account number and not the Canara Bank account number and hence the subsidized amount initially sent to HDFC bank account and in the absence of the vital evidence and when the amount wrongly credit to HDFC Bank where there is the account is not existing and itself is negligence on the part of O.P.No.1 and for which complainant suffered and it amounts to deficiency in service.  Under the circumstances we hereby directed the O.P.No.1 to credit the amount of Rs.1515.22 to the complainant’s account maintained in the Canara Bank as stated in the complaint and also to pay Rs.1,000/-  towards the cost of the proceedings. However the complaint against O.P.No.2 and 3 are hereby dismissed. According we answered the Point No.(A) in the affirmative and Point No.(B) in the partly affirmative.  

POINT No. (C):

11.   On the basis of answering the Points (A) and (B), in the result, we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

1. The complaint is allowed-in-part with cost.
2. The O.P No.1 i.e. Murali Enterprise represented by its Authorized Signatory is hereby directed to credit the amount of Rs.1515/- to the complainant’s account maintained in the Canara Bank as stated in the complaint within 30 days, failing which O.P.No.1 is directed to pay interest on the above said amount at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of complaint till its realization.
3.  Further O.P No.1 is hereby directed to pay Rs.1,000/- towards cost of the proceedings.
4. The complaint against O.P.No.2 and 3 is hereby dismissed.

5. The O.P No.1 is hereby directed to comply the order of this Forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and submit the compliance report to this Forum within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order.

6. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 8^th  Day of January 2018)

MEMBER                 MEMBER           PRESIDENT

*RAK