Kerala

Kannur

CC/115/2006

K.T.Latheef,Rubeenas,Anerimotta,P.O.Muzhapala,Kannur - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.The Secretary,Anjarakkandy Farmers sc Bank Ltd,P.O.Mamba,Kannur - Opp.Party(s)

04 Sep 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/115/2006

K.T.Latheef,Rubeenas,Anerimotta,P.O.Muzhapala,Kannur
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

1.The Secretary,Anjarakkandy Farmers sc Bank Ltd,P.O.Mamba,Kannur
2.Managing Director,Kerala state consumer federation,Gandhi nagar,Cochin.
3.Manager,Koldy Petroleum India,Vannaqmada,Moongilamada,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):




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 by the power of attorney holder of one K.T.Latheef under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs 5750/- with interest and cost. The complainant’s case is that he had availed gas connection from the first opposite party by giving an amount of Rs 5750/- with a stipulation that the amount will be refunded at the time of surrendering gas connection. The gas was supplied by the 2nd and 3rd opposite parties as a joint venture. Subsequently the supply of refilled cylinder became irregular and that supplied was of substandard in quality and quantity. The first opposite party told the complainant that 2nd and 3rd opposite parties were liable for this. Because of this the complainant had surrendered the gas connection and demanded for the amount as promised. But the opposite parties were not ready to do so. Hence this complaint. On receiving the notices from the Forum all the opposite parties were filed their version. The first opposite party filed its version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection by depositing an amount of Rs 5750/-. But contended that the amount was handed over to the opposite party no.2 and the delay caused in supplying gas was due to the act of opposite parties 2 & 3. The opposite party no.1 acted as only an agent and hence they have no liability to refund the amount. Opposite party no.2 also filed version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection by giving an amount of Rs 5750/- to opposite party no.1 and opposite party no.1 had handed over the same to opposite party no.2. But out of this amount they had given Rs 5500/-to 3rd opposite party and Rs 100/- to first opposite party and Rs 150/-was appropriated by themselves. The delay caused was not due to any act or omission on their part but due to the withdrawal of opposite party no.3 from supplying and hence if any deficiency is found, only opposite party no.3 is liable for the same. Opposite party no.3 also filed version contending that they had no liability to refund the amount since there was no contract to that effect and hence no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party no.3. The contract is with opposite party no.2 for supplying two cylinders and regulator and this part was performed by opposite party no.3 and hence the complaint against opposite party no.3 is liable to be dismissed. On the above pleadings the following issues are raised for consideration. 1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of opposite parties? 2. Relief and cost. The evidence in the above case consists of the affidavit filed in lieu of chief examination and Ext. A1. ISSUE Nos. 1 & 2: The complaint has been filed by one K.T.Mustafa, the power of attorney holder of one K.T.Latheef and had produced the power of attorney also along with the complaint. The admission of opposite parties proves that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying an amount of Rs 5750/-. The Ext.A1 is the surrender certificate. The opposite parties further admit that there caused some delay in supplying refilled gas cylinder. Further they were not refunded the deposit amount also. So we are of the opinion that there caused some deficiency in service and for which all the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable. So all the opposite parties are directed to refund the amount of Rs 5750/- to the complainnt. In the result the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties to refund the amount of 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 at liberty to execute the order under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act. Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-PRESIDENT APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1. Receipt dt. 24.3.2004 issued by the first opposite party Exhibits for the opposite party – NIL Witness examined for the complainant-nil Witness examined for the opposite party – NIL Forwarded/ by order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT




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