Delhi

East Delhi

CC/176/2013

Smt. Kismattunisha - Complainant(s)

Versus

Amar Gas Service - Opp.Party(s)

16 May 2013

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, SAINI ENCLAVE: DELHI-92

CC No.176/2013:

In the matter of:        

1.   Smt. Kismattunisha

W/o. Late Chand Babu

 

2.   Mohd. Shafiq (Father of deceased)

    Both R/o.D - 487, Janta Mazdoor Camp,

    Jafrabad, Seelampur, Delhi

 

3.   Mohd. Sabir (Performa Party)

Majdoor Janta Colony,

Shahdara, Delhi

            Complainants           

Vs

1.    M/s. Amar Gas Service

2298, Street No.4, Bihari Colony,

Shahdara, Delhi – 110 032

 

2.    Indian Oil Corporation

Northern Region

Indian Oil Bhawan,

1^st Arbindo Marg, Yusuf Sarai,

New Delhi – 110 016

Registered Office At:

Ali Yavar Jung Marg,

            Bandra East, Mumbai – 400 051

 

3.  National Insurance Co. Ltd.

     Division –S, Hemkunt House, 7^thth Floor,

     Rajendra Place, New Delhi – 110 008

Respondents

            __________________________________

CC No.177/2013:

In the matter of:

1. Smt. Imaman (Mother of deceased)

W/o. Late Mohd. Khaliq

2. Samreen (Sister of deceased)
3. Master Nafis (Brother of deceased)

    (Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 are minor

      Through their Mother i.e., Petitioner No.1) 

All R/o.D - 487, Janta Colony, Welcome,

            Delhi

 

4. Mohd. Sabir (Performa Party)

MajdoorJanta Colony,

Shahdara, Delhi

            Complainants           

Vs

1. M/s. Amar Gas Service

2298, Street No.4, Bihari Colony, Shahdara,

Delhi – 110 032

 

2. Indian Oil Corporation

Northern Region

Indian Oil Bhawan

1^st ArbindoMarg,

Yusuf Sarai, New Delhi – 110 016

Registered Office At:

Ali Yavar Jung Marg,

Bandra East, Mumbai – 400 051

 

3.  National Insurance Co. Ltd.

     Division –S, Hemkunt House, 7^thth Floor,

     Rajendra Place, New Delhi – 110 008

Respondents

                      ___________________________

 

CC No.178/2013:

In the matter of:        

    1.    Smt. Rukshana(Mother of deceased)

W/o. Mohd. Shafiq

 

2.    Mohd. Shafiq (Father of deceased)

      Both R/o.D - 487, JantaMazdoor Camp,

      Jafrabad, Seelampur, Delhi

 

3.    Mohd. Sabir (Performa Party)

MajdoorJanta Colony,

Shahdara, Delhi

            Complainants           

Vs

1.    M/s. Amar Gas Service

2298, Street No.4, Bihari Colony,

Shahdara, Delhi – 110 032

 

2.    Indian Oil Corporation

Northern Region

Indian Oil Bhawan,

1^st Arbindo Marg, Yusuf Sarai,

New Delhi – 110 016

 

Registered Office At:

Ali Yavar Jung Marg,

            Bandra East, Mumbai – 400 051

 

3.  National Insurance Co. Ltd.

     Division –S, Hemkunt House, 7^thth Floor,

     Rajendra Place, New Delhi – 110 008

Respondents

Date of Admission – 14/03/2013

                                                                           Date of Order           - 08/09/2015

 

ORDER

 

Ms.Poonam Malhotra, Member:

 

 

This order shall dispose of three complaints with CC.No.176/2013, 177/2013 and 178/2013 with similar facts. The brief conspectus of facts are that the complainants are the legal heirs of Chand Babu (CC.No.176/2013), Mohd. Anis (CC. No.177/2013) and Master Ishan (CC. No.178/2013) who succumbed to severe burn injuries resulting from a fire alleged to have broken out due to a blast from a LPG cylinder due to leakage / manufacturing defect. It is submitted that Mohd. Sabir is the Registered Consumer of Respondent No.II through Respondent No.I vide Consumer No.35855.  A gas cylinder was delivered to him on 25/08/2012.  It is alleged that on 06/09/2012 when the said gas cylinder was being used by the family members for cooking suddenly fire broke out with a blast from the cylinder due to leakage in which Chand Babu, Mohd. Anis and Master Ishan sustained burn injuries.  They were shifted to GTB Hospital by the police officials of PS Welcome, where they succumbed to their injuries on 11/09/2012, 14/09/2012 and 06/09/2012 respectively.  Applications  for claim were made to Respondent No.I but in vain.  It is in these circumstances that the complainants in CC No. 176/2013 and CC.No. 177/2013 have prayed for compensation of Rs.9,50,000/- each and Rs.4,90,000/- in CC No.178/2013 together with litigation cost and interest in each of the complaints.

Notices were issued to the respondents and they put up appearance.  All the respondents have contested the present complaint and filed their respective written versions.

Evidence by way of Affidavit filed by the complainant and Respondent No.III in support of their respective cases. 

Heard and perused the record.

We have scrutinized the record and on threadbare scrutiny it is observed that it is an admitted fact that Mohd. Sabir resident of 1049/D – 450, Mazdoor Janta Colony, Shahdara, Delhi – 110 032 is the Registered Consumer of LPG Connection of Respondent No.II through Respondent No.I vide Consumer No. 35855 against a cylinder was booked by Mohd. Sabir vide Order No.8878 on 22/08/2012 at about 09:09 AM and the same was delivered by Respondent No.I to him at his registered address on 25/08/2012 vide Delivery No.9565, copy of which is filed on record as Annexure to the complaint as Paper 7.  It is also admitted by the complainants that fire broke out from the gas cylinder in the house ofthe real brother of Mohd. Sabir who resides at  D -487, Mazdoor Janta Colony, Delhi – 110 053, the premises where the incident is alleged to have occurred.  It is relevant to mention here that the complainants have intentionally not filed on record the copy of the report lodged with the police in response to which the police officials from the PS Welcome came to the incident spot on 06/09/2012 and shifted the three victims to GTB Hospital for treatment to conceal the material facts with regard to the person who using the cylinder at the time of the alleged incident the and  the place where the cylinder was being used.  All these facts leave no room for doubt that though the cylinder was delivered to Mohd. Sabir, the Registered Consumer of the LPG Connection with Consumer No. 35855 but the same was unauthorisedly being used by the complainants at the time the mishap happened. The Registered Consumer had given the cylinder to the complainants for usage in contravention of the rules & regulations subject to which the LPG connection was issued to him.  It is pertinent to mention here that the liability of Respondent No.III under the policy purchased by it against public risk is limited only to the Registered Consumers of Respondent No.II subject to the terms and conditions of the policy and does not extend to unauthorised users.  Taking the above facts and circumstances into consideration we arrive at an inference that the deceased persons were not the authorised users as they are not the Registered Consumers of the Respondent Nos. I & II and, thus, there is no privity of contract between the complainants and the respondents and no liability can be cast upon them for the alleged loss. In the absence of any privity of contract between the deceased persons through whom the complainants have made their respective claims and the respondents, no cause of action arises to the complainants against the respondents.  In legal lexes, the complainants have no locus standi to institute the present complaint.

 

Taking into consideration the discussion and observations made supra, we are at an inference that the present complaint is not maintainable and it deserves to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed.

Let the order be kept in each of the respective files and copy of the order to be sent to all the parties as per rules.

 

 

   (Subhash Gupta)                                      (Poonam Malhotra)                                 (N.A. Zaidi)

          Member                                                                   Member                                          President