CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 31st day of January 2018
PRESENT : SMT. SHINY.P.R, PRESIDENT Date of filing:01/02/2017
: SMT.SUMA K.P, MEMBER
: SRI.V.P.ANANTHA NARAYANAN, MEMBER
CC/25/2017
M.Hamsa,
S/o Muhammed (Late),
14/146-27, Palm Plaza,
Kalmandapam, Palakkad -678 001.
(By Adv.Akbar Ali) : Complainant
1. Abdul Rahiman, : Opposite parties
K.M.Petroleum,
(Petrol Pump),
IOC Dealer,
Vaniyamkulam,
Palakkad.
2. Manager,
K.M.Petroleum,
IOC Petrol Pump,
Vaniyamkulam,
Palakkad.
(By Advs.M.P.Ravi & M.J.Vince)
O R D E R
By Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
The case of the complainant is that on 12th November 2016 complainant and his daughter were coming to Palakkad and when the petrol in their travelling motor cycle exhausted, in order to fill the petrol, the complainant went to K.M.Petroleum Petrol Pumb in Vaniyamkulam town owned by 1st opposite party, where the 2nd opposite party is working as the Manager. According to the complainant, in his hands there was only one number 500 Rupees note which he gave to the pump workers and demanded them to fill in his vehicle petrol for Rs.100/-, but the pump workers refused to give petrol to the complainant and asked him to give 100 Rupees note to fill petrol for Rs.100/-. Complainant pleads that workers were lying of not having the balance in their hands and he was denied petrol for Rs.100/-. Then the complainant demanded the pump workers to fill petrol for Rs.200/-, then for Rs.300/- which were also refused by the workers telling lies to the complainant of “no change”. According to the complainant, 100 Rupee notes were being received from the vehicle users who came there for filling fuel at that time and the same was also captured on the CC TV. The complainant immediately registered his complaint in the complaint book maintained in the petrol pump in the presence of the 2nd opposite party. According to the complainant, the 1st opposite party was cleverly using the 500 Rupees and thousand Rupees notes prohibition situation by not distributing 100 Rupee notes collected from the people and that was the reason why the complainant did not get petrol for Rs.100/-. At around 7 pm the complainant asked for help from a passing by auto riksha to get petrol for him. The auto driver agreed to get the complainant petrol by going to Ottappalam and believing his words, his only 500 Rupees note was given to him to bring petrol form Ottappalam. The auto driver did not come back nor got him petrol up to 8.30 pm. Knowing that he was deceived, the complainant stopped a passing by taxi car, halting his motor cycle near Ajapa Madam, Vaniyamkulam and travelling by the taxi, dropped her daughter at Kollengode, by the same taxi he reached Palakkad and purchased petrol. The petrol was filled in his bike and by which he reached Palakkad. Taxi fare of Rs.3,600/- was paid by the complainant. According to the complainant opposite parties did not contact him the next day nor call him, nor provide any reliefs for the difficulties caused to him and his daughter. On November 14, 2016 a complaint was given to Palakkad District Collector for getting justice explaining the difficulties undergone by the complainant and his daughter, to take action against the opposite parties for their misdeeds. A copy of this complaint and a letter stopping his relationship with IOC were also sent to the Area Sales Manager of the Indian Oil Corporation, Mr.Sreenath, from whom no action was taken so far. Complainant prays to the Hon’ble Forum to direct the opposite parties to produce CCTV footage of the opposite parties petrol pump, denomination slips given, when money is deposited in to bank and complaint/suggestion books before this Forum. Within hours of giving complaint to IOC officials, a person said to be the son of the 1st opposite party approached the complainant and offered to him to find a suitable solution by making enquiry, after hearing complainant’s difficulties and miseries. According to the complainant, no relief was so far made which caused him to file this complaint. Based on the complaint given to District Collector, Palakkad this complaint was filed to this Forum for relief in which the complainant prays to the Hon’ble Forum to direct the opposite parties to give him a compensation of Rs.50,000/-, Rs.3,600/- by way of taxi fare, Rs.500/- towards cheating loss, Rs.1,000/- towards litigation expenses etc should also be paid to the complainant.
Complainant was admitted and notices were sent to opposite parties who entered appearance and filed version. In their version opposite parties contend that all the statements in the complaint except those admitted are false and hence denied by them. According to them complaint does not legally exist and is devoid of good faith and the complainant is not entitled to any relief. Opposite parties deny the statements made by the complainant in the paras 1 to 16 of his complaint, being false. Actually, at the time when the complainant came to the opposite parties petrol pump for filling petrol in his motor cycle, there was no change with the opposite parties to give the balance amount after accepting 500 Rupee note from the complainant. According to the opposite parties, they did not purposefully refuse to give petrol and deny service to the complainant. On 08.11.2016 after prohibiting 500 Rupees and 1000 Rupees currency notes, due to lack of “change” the working of the pump had to be stopped. Opposite parties contend that the serious problem of lack of change was experienced at that time as per the news paper reports and in many places there were verbal duels between customers and petrol pump workers. The statement that purposefully balance amount was not given to the complainant and thereby caused difficulties to him was false, baseless and made only for the purpose of the complaint. Opposite parties contend that complainant did not experience any difficulties. The statements that taxi was called, from Palakkad petrol was brought, an auto driver absconded after taking Rs.500/- from the complainant were made falsely only for the purpose of this case. According to the opposite parties, the complaint was falsely made to cause difficulties to opposite parties and to recover amounts from them by any means. As per the letter given by the Consortium of Indian Petroleum Dealers to the Reserve Bank of India on 16.11.2016, “change” should be made available for the use of opposite parties and other petrol pump owners. Therefore opposite parties contend that this experimentally filed complaint should be dismissed with cost and the complainant is not entitled to any reliefs prayed for by him and opposite parties have no liability to provide the same to the complainant. Hence, opposite parties pray to this Forum to dismiss the complaint with cost by accepting their contentions.
Complainant and opposite parties filed chief affidavits. Complainant was cross examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A6 series were marked from the side of the complainant. Opposite party was cross examined as DW1. No documents were marked from the side of the opposite parties. Complainant and opposite parties were heard.
The following issues arise in this case:
- Whether there is any negligence and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
- If so, the remedy and relief available to the complainant?
Issues 1&2
Complainant has the case that on 12.11.2016, he travelled in his motor cycle from Ponnani to Palakkad along with his daughter residing in Kollengode. When he reached Vaniyamkulam he found that no sufficient petrol was there in his vehicle to complete his journey. Therefore the complainant stopped his vehicle and went to K.M Petroleum (IOC outlet) at Vaniyamkulam. Although, the complainant requested pump workers to fill petrol for Rs.100/- by tendering Rs.500/- note, the pump workers refused to fill petrol asking the complainant to pay Rs.100/- exact. Since, complainant had no “change”, he requested them to fill petrol for Rs.200/-, further for Rs.300/- but his requests were refused by the workers who demanded the exact amount of Rs.100/-Rs.200/-, Rs.300/-. Then, the complainant explained the facts to the 2nd opposite party and requested him to direct the pump workers to fill petrol for Rs.100/-, Rs.200/-, Rs.300/-which was refused by the 2nd opposite party. Then, the complainant registered a complaint in the complaint book maintained by opposite parties. Copy of the complaint written by the complainant to Customer suggestion/complaint book dated.12.11.2016 was marked as Ext.A3 which mentioned that complaint is recorded about refusing filling of petrol to the complainant’s vehicle at 5.30 pm due to telling of lie of “lack of change”. According to the complainant, though he filed an application to produce the footage of CC TV installed in the 2nd opposite party’s cabin at the relevant time, opposite parties did not willfully produce the CC TV footage which shows a clear violation from the part of opposite parties. After travelling for half a kilo meter near Ajapa Madam, Vaniyamkulam, the vehicle of the complainant stood still due to no fuel and an auto driver offered him his help to bring petrol from Ottappalam. Believing his words Rs.500/- was given to him by the complainant, but the driver did not come back and cheated him. Then, he caught a taxi and reached Kollengode, dropped her daughter there and returned to Palakkad and after adjusting petrol from a pump at Palakkad, complainant returned to Vaniyamkulam, filled petrol in his vehicle and took back his vehicle to Palakkad. According to the complainant, a taxi fare of Rs.3,600/- was given to the taxi driver. According to the complainant, the opposite parties purposefully denied petrol to the complainant which amounted to negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice due to which complainant and his daughter suffered a lot. A complaint was also given to Palakkad District Collector marked as Ext.A1 which narrated this unfortunate incident and requested her for the legal measures to be taken against opposite parties. A reply from Kochi Office of the IOC as per RTI Act was marked as Ext.A2 which provides information requested by the complainant. As per Ext.A4 which shows explanation called for from Sreenath (Area Sales Manager of IOC), Suresh and Chandran are recorded. Ext.A5 is an attested true copy of the entry made by the complainant in customer suggestion/complaint book – page No.01. Ext.A6 is the original of pay-in slips from 08.11.2016 to 30.11.2016 which indicated remittances made by opposite party into State Bank of India during this period. In their version the opposite parties deny all the contentions raised by the complainant. The opposite parties deny the allegation that the complainant had only Rs.500/- with him, they refused to accept the same stating that they could not give balance amount due to lack of change, payment of Rs.500/- to an auto driver by the complainant, availing of taxi service and payment of taxi fare of Rs.3,600/- by the complainant. According to opposite parties, the attempt of the complainant is to grab money from the opposite parties. Opposite parties also contend that after demonetization made by the Central Government on 08.11.2016, this opposite party was forced to close the operation of the pump due to non availability of lower denomination notes and when the complainant reached the opposite parties pump there were no sufficient lower denomination notes and only because of that the opposite parties could not provide petrol for Rs.100/- after accepting Rs.500/- note from the complainant. The opposite parties did not willfully deny petrol to the complainant. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties and the complainant is not entitled to get any relief claimed by him.
From the affidavits and documentary evidences, we understand that the complainant went to 1st opposite party’s petrol pump at Vaniyamkulam on 12.11.2016 to fill petrol in his motor cycle and asked the pump workers to fill petrol for Rs.100/- or for Rs.200/-, or for Rs.300/- which they refused due to lack of the exact balance amount to be given to the complainant; but we observe that complainant has not proved that opposite parties had sufficient 100 Rupee currency notes with them to give the balance amount to the complainant after filling petrol for Rs.100/- or for Rs.200/- or for Rs.300/- in his motor cycle. Further, we also observe that the complainant has applied to the opposite party only on June 21, 2017 for getting CCTV footage of the disputed incident happened on 12.11.2016 and hence the CCTV footage of the disputed incident could not be made available because the same could be made available only for 1 ½ months since the date of happening of this incident on 12.11.2016. It is also observed that complainant has not produced any witness present at the concerned petrol pump at the time of this unfortunate incident for cross examination to support his arguments of deficiency in service committed by the opposite parties. Further, the complainant is not seen having given a Police complaint against the auto driver who cheated the complainant to the extent Rs.500/-. We also view that the complainant has not produced taxi fare receipt of Rs.3,600/- to show that he travelled by taxi from Vaniyamkulam to Kollengode, Kollengode to Palakkad and Palakkad to Vaniyamkulam. He has also failed to produce taxi driver and his daughter before this Forum for cross examination. Further, complainant has not produced a bill for showing payment for purchase of petrol to a petrol pump at Palakkad in order to bring the same to fill his stranded motor cycle due to lack of fuel at Ajapa Madam, Vaniyamkulam.
In the light of all of the above, we view that the complainant has not been able to prove negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice committed by opposite parties. The result is that complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 31st day of January 2018.
Sd/- Shiny. P.R
President
Sd/-
Suma. K.P Member
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 - Photo copy of complaint given by the complainant to the District Collector,
Palakkad dated.14.11.16 about the Vaniyamkulam Indian Oil Corporation
Petrol Pump
Ext.A2 - Original reply from Kochi Office of the IOC as per RTI Act to the complainant
Ext.A3 - Copy of the complaint written by the complainant on 12.11.2016 in customer
suggestion/complaint book
Ext.A4 - Photo copy of explanation called for from Sreenath, Suresh and Chandran
Ext.A5 - Attested True copy of entry made by the complainant on 12.11.16 in
Customer Suggestion/Complaint Book – page no.01
Ext.A6 series - Originals of pay-in slips from 08.11.2016 to 30.11.2016 indicating
remittances made by opposite parties into State Bank of India
Exhibits marked on the side of opposite parties
Nil
Witness examined on the side of complainant
PW1 - M.Hamsa
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
DW1 - Manoj Kumar
Cost
Nil
