Kerala

Kannur

CC/179/2006

M.Vasu , Anandha Bhavan, Ponniam West, Kathirur - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.Secretary, Kadirur S.C.Bank , Kadirur - Opp.Party(s)

07 Oct 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/179/2006

M.Vasu , Anandha Bhavan, Ponniam West, Kathirur
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

1.Secretary, Kadirur S.C.Bank , Kadirur
2.2.Managing Director, State consumer federation Kochi
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. GOPALAN.K 2. JESSY.M.D 3. PREETHAKUMARI.K.P

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

Smt. Preethakumari.K.P. This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs 5750/- with interest. The complainant’s case is that he had availed gas connection from first opposite party by giving an amount of Rs 5750/- with a stipulation that the deposited amount will be returned back at the time of surrendering the gas connection. Later on the supply of gas became irregular and that of supplied was of substandard both in quality and quantity. Moreover the price of gas was inordinately increased. Because of this the complainant had surrendered the gas connection and demanded for refund. But the opposite parties were not ready to do so. Hence this complaint. On receiving the notice from the Forum, the 2nd opposite party had filed version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying an amount of Rs 5750/-. 2nd opposite party further admitted that there caused some delay in supplying the refilled gas cylinder due to the withdrawal of Koldy Petroleum from supplying gas. Moreover out of the amount received Rs 5500/- was given to the Koldy Petroleum, Rs 100/- to first opposite party and Rs 150/- was appropriated by themselves. So they have no liability to refund the amount. From the above pleadings the following issues are raised for consideration. 1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of the opposite parties? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? 3. Relief and cost. The evidence in the above case consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Ext. A1. ISSUES 1 to 3: The admission of opposite party shows that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying an amount of Rs 5750/- and some delay was caused in supplying the refilled gas cylinder. Ext. A1 is the surrender certificate . So we are of the opinion that some deficiency was caused on the part of opposite parties for which opposite parties are jointly and severally liable and the complainant is entitled to get the amount of Rs 5750/-. Issues are answered accordingly. In the result , the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties to refund Rs 5750/- ( Rupees five thousand seven hundred and fifty only) to the complainant within one month from the receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled to execute the order under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act. Sd/-MEMBER Sd/- MEMBER Sd/-PRESIDENT APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1. Certificate dt. 26.8.2008 issued by the first opposite party Exhibits for the opposite party – NIL Witness examined for the complainant PW1. Complainant Witness examined for the opposite party – NIL Forwarded/ by order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT




......................GOPALAN.K
......................JESSY.M.D
......................PREETHAKUMARI.K.P