Kerala

Kannur

CC/08/50

K.V.Fathima, D/o Ibrahim,Shameena Manzil, Chembilode,P.O.Mowanchery - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

03 Jun 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/50

K.V.Fathima, D/o Ibrahim,Shameena Manzil, Chembilode,P.O.Mowanchery
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

1.Secretary, Koyyode S..Bank, Koyyode Branch,P.O.Koyyode.
2.Managing Director, Kerala State Co.opConsumer Federation, Gandhi Nagar, Ernakulam, Kochi20
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


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

K. GOPALAN: PRESIDENT This is a petition filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act to refund the amount deposited with the opposite party Rs 5750/- with compensation and cost. As per the averments in the complaint, complainant has applied for gas connection on 5.5.1998. She has remitted an amount of Rs 5750/- for gas connection on 16.9.98 and opposite party 1 bank issued receipt for the same. The Ist opposite party bank agreed to refund the amount when the gas is not supplied and equipments are surrendered. The Ist opposite party was irregular in supplying the gas. Though repeatedly complained, there was no result. Hence the complainant forced to surrender the gas connection and returned the cylinder and regulator on 10th January 2005. The complainant asked the Ist opposite party bank to return the deposit amount but told the complainant to come another day with the receipt. Complainant approached the bank several times but the amount was not returned. Thereafter complainant sent a lawyer notice for which the opposite party 1` bank sent a reply telling that the bank is distributing gas only as an agent of Kerala State Co.op: Consumer Federation Ltd and the connection fee of Rs 5750 had been transferred to them for the supply of gas . They further asked the complainant to approach 2nd opposite party , Consumer Federation if she had any complaint. The complainant remitted an amount with opposite party 1 bank and receipt issued by opposite party 1 so that opposite party No.1 is liable to return the amount . Hence this complaint for getting refund of the amount Rs 5750 as deposit , Rs 250 as cost of lawyer notice and Rs 1000/- as compensation for mental pain. Notice was issued to all the parties but opposite party 1 and 2 neither cared to appear before the Forum nor filed the version. Subsequently opposite party 1 and 2 were called absent and set exparte. On the above pleadings the following issues are framed for consideration. 1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of opposite parties? 2. Whether complainant is entitled to get refund of the amount ? 3. Relief and cost. The evidence consists of oral testimony of PW1 and Exts. A1 to A3 marked on the side of the complainant .ISSUE Nos.1 to 3: The complainant has paid an amount of Rs 5750/- with the opposite party bank for getting LPG connection . But distribution of gas became irregular subsequently . The supply was interrupted without any reason on the part of the complainant. Thus the complainant forced to surrender the gas connection and asked for refund of the amount. The complainant produced documents to show that she has taken LPG connection from the opposite party 1 bank. Ext.A1 is the receipt issued by opposite party 1 bank for Rs 5750/- for gas connection. Ext.A2 is the notice sent to opposite party 1 bank for and on behalf of the complainant. Ext. A3 is the reply notice sent to complainant by opposite party 1 bank. Ext. A2 is an evidence that the complainant has lodged complaint before the opposite party 1 bank . Ext.A3 reveals that the complainant was the consumer and opposite party 1 bank was not able to solve the issue of complainant as consumer. It is quite understandable that when the gas is not supplied the consumer has no use with the empty cylinder and regulator. Consumer has no other to go except surrender the cylinder and regulator. So it is the duty of the opposite parties to refund the amount to complainant. But the amount was not refunded. This is clear deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. The complainant is entitled to get the amount of Rs 5750/- deposited with the opposite party. Thus these issues are answered in favour of the complainant. In the result, the complaint is allowed partly directing the opposite parties to refund an amount of Rs 5750/- 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 as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act. No cost. Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-PRESIDENT Appendix Exhibits for the complainant A1. Receipt dt. 16.9.98 issued by the Ist opposite party A2. Copy of the lawyer notice dt.27.12.2007 sent to the Ist opposite party A3. Reply notice dt.12.1.2008 sent bythe Ist opposite party. Exhibits for the opposite party- Nil. Witness examined for the complainant PW1. Complainant Witness examined for the opposite party – Nil Fowarded/ by order Senior Superintendent.