Kerala

Kannur

CC/08/116

K.C.Kunhamina,W/o/Muhammed Haji, Jameela Manzil, Near Hassan Mukku, Koyyode, P.O.Koyyode - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.Secretary, Koyyod S.C.Bank, P.O.Koyyode - Opp.Party(s)

K.Ajithkumar,Thalassery

10 Dec 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/116

K.C.Kunhamina,W/o/Muhammed Haji, Jameela Manzil, Near Hassan Mukku, Koyyode, P.O.Koyyode
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

1.Secretary, Koyyod S.C.Bank, P.O.Koyyode
2.Managing Director,Kerala State Co.op.Consumer Federation, Gandhi Nagar, Kochi
3.Manager, Koldy Petroleum India, Moongilamada,Vannamada, Kozhinhampara,Palakkad.
...........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):




ORDER

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.

 

Smt.M.D.Jessy, Member

 

            This is a complaint filed under section12 of the consumer protection Act for getting an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.5750/- with interest and cost.

 

            The case of the complainant in brief is as follows: The opposite parties jointly provided gas connection for domestic purposes. The opposite parties offered spot connection and regular supply of gas cylinders without any delay. When complainant approached the 1st opposite party he assured that 2nd opposite party will provide gas connection on deposit of Rs.5750/-, which will be refunded in the event of termination of the gas connection. Complainant paid Rs.5750/- and availed gas connection. But later on the supply of gas happened to be irregular as against the assurance of the first opposite party. More over thy supplied refilled gas cylinders were of substandard quality and quantity. Hence the complainant cancelled the gas connection and asked for refund of the amount 1st opposite party was not ready to refund the amount and hence the complaint.

            On receiving the complaint notices were issued to the opposite parties. 2nd opposite party filed their version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying Rs.5750/- to the 1st opposite party. But the 1st opposite party was handed over the amount to 2nd opposite party. Out of which 2nd opposite party had given Rs.5500/- to 3rd   opposite party, Rs.100/- to 1st opposite party and 2nd opposite party had appropriated Rs.150/- itself. They further admits that some delay was caused in supplying refilled gas cylinder, which was caused not because of any default committed by 2nd opposite party but due to withdrawal of 3rd opposite party from supplying gas and hence if any liability is found only 3rd opposite party is liable.

            On the above pleadings the following issues were raised for consideration.

1.Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

2.Whether the complainant is entitled for remedy as prayed in the complaint?

3.Relief and cost.

            The evidence consists of affidavit of complainant and Exdts.A1 and A2.

 

 

IssueNo.1 to 3

            The complainant has stated in the complaint that she has availed gas connection from 1st opposite party by paying an amount of Rs.5750/-. The complainant was assured that the amount would be refunded at the time when the equipments are surrendered. Exts.A1 and A2 receipts issued by 1st opposite party prove that the complainant has taken gas connection from opposite parties. Complainant stated that the opposite parties did not supply gas regularly. It is understandable that if there is no supply of gas that creates much trouble to those consumers of gas users. When it was complained to 1st opposite party his explanation was that 2nd and 3rd opposite parties are responsible for those troubles. Exts.A1 and A2 prove that the complainant paid Rs.5750/- at the time of availing gas connection. Hence all the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to refund Rs.5750/- to the complainant. Thus issues 1 to 3 are found in favour of the 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.Receipt dt.3.4.98 issued by OP1

A2.Receipt dt.25.4.98 issued by OP1.

Exhibits for the opposite parties

Nil

Witness examined for either side

Nil

 

                                                            /forwarded by order/

 

                                                               Senior Superintendent

 

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur

 

Despatched on

Through post/hand

 




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