KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPEAL NO. 56/14
JUDGMENT DATED:28.04.2014
PRESENT :
JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI : PRESIDENT
SHRI.V.V. JOSE : MEMBER
Rahul Indane,
10/187, Thottathil Bldg.,
Alumchode, Valancherry-676 552,
R/by its Proprietor, Vinod Kumar, : APPELLANT
S/o V.C. Nair.
(By Adv: Sri. Narayan.R)
Vs.
1. Abdussamad K.N,
S/o Abdul Azeez, Kottathara Cottage,
Kanhippura, Krippol, Malappuram-676 552.
: RESPONDENTS
2. The Area Manager,
Indian Oil Corporation, P.M.K. Tower,
Civil Station.P.O, Kozhikkode-673 020.
(By Adv: Sri.Abdul Shukkur. A)
JUDGMENT
JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI: PRESIDENT
This is an appeal filed by the first opposite party in CC.375/13 on the file of CDRF, Malappuram under section 15 of Consumer Protection Act, against the order dated, January 24, 2013 directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation .
2. The case of the complainant as testified by him as PW1 before the Forum and as detailed in the complaint in brief is this:-
Complainant is a retired section officer of the Calicut University. He has an LPG gas connection of the first opposite party who is the agency of 2nd opposite party, the Indian Oil Corporation. His consumer number is 4809. Complainant booked for a refill cylinder on August 31, 2013 with the opposite party No.1. The first opposite party informed that gas cylinder will be made available to him as per cash memo dated, September 20, 2013. On September 25, 2013 complainant was informed that the said booking is cancelled. Therefore he again booked the gas cylinder. Meanwhile the gas cylinder with the complainant exhausted. Booking made on September 26, 2013 was also cancelled by the first opposite party without giving any reason. Therefore complainant filed the complaint claiming compensation.
3. Though the opposite parties received notice they did not appear before the Forum therefore the Forum accepted the evidence of PW1 complainant marked Exts.A1 to A5 and allowed the complaint and awarded a compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant. Opposite parties have come up in appeal challenging the said order of the Forum.
4. In this appeal the opposite parties contended that the first opposite party was laid up and that therefore he could not attend the Forum in time.
5. Taking into account the nature of the contentions raised by both parties we feel that an opportunity should be given to the opposite parties to contest the case on merits. Therefore on April 04, 2014 we have ordered that appeal will be allowed on payment of cost of Rs.1000/- to the complainant. Today appellant produced receipt for having paid the cost. Therefore appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the Forum allowing the complaint is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Forum for fresh disposal in accordance with law. Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 30.06.2014.
JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI: PRESIDENT
V.V. JOSE : MEMBER
VL.