Orissa

Bargarh

CC/09/14

Aditya Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Basanti Munda - Opp.Party(s)

Sri R.K.Pati and others

23 Feb 2010

ORDER


OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM(COURT)
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM(COURT),AT:COURT PREMISES,PO/DIST:BARGARH,PIN:768028,ORISSA
consumer case(CC) No. CC/09/14

Aditya Sharma
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Basanti Munda
Area Manager,
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. MISS BHAGYALAXMI DORA 2. SHRI GOURI SHANKAR PRADHAN

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

Presented by Miss B.L.Dora, Member. In this case, the Complainant is a consumer of cooking gas vide consumer No.1546 of Brisa Munda Indane Gas. On Dt.26/02/2009, he has paid Rs.341.55(Rupees three hundred forty one and fifty five paise)only to the Opposite Party No. 1(one) for the refilling of the cooking gas and as per the direction of the Opposite Party, went to the office on Dt.02/03/2009 where the Opposite Party No.1(one) said about the non-availability of the cylinder and said to come after five days. On the next time also the Opposite Party said about the same non-availability and on protection, rebuked in rough language to the Complainant. The said amount was paid for the home delivery of the refilled cylinder. But due to delay in refilling of the cylinder, the Complainant with his family members suffered a lot of mental agony, harassment and financial loss. This non-filling and non-delivery of booked cylinder at home in due time by the Opposite Party amounts to deficiency in service to the consumer. On being harassed by this the complainant has filed this case and prayed Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand)only for mental agony and harassment with Rs.1,000/-(Rupees one thousand) for litigation expenses. In response to this, the Opposite Party No.1(one) has filed his version on admitting the consumer ship and booking of the said cylinder on Dt.26/02/2009. The Opposite Party has delivered the filled cylinder on the next day i.e Dt.27/02/2009 because the cylinder allotted to the petitioner on Dt.26/02/2009 was defective. The Opposite Party denies all other allegations made against him in the complaint petition. To counter the version, the Complainant has filed an affidavit on stating that the Opposite Party never delivered the filled cylinder on Dt.27/02/2009. In fact, the Opposite Party has directed the petitioner to come on Dt.02/03/2009. But on arrival, the Opposite Party said about the non-availability of the cylinder and showed rude behavior. The Complainant has contradicted the version of the Opposite Party that, he is using his cooking gas for commercial purpose. In support of his case the Complainant has filed the xerox copy of his consumer receipt book along with the entries made in Dt.26/02/2009. The Opposite Party No.2(two) has received notice but neither filed any step nor appeared before the Forum and has been set ex-parte. Perused the documents, heard from the counsels, this is a contest where Complainant made his grievance for the non-delivery of the refilled cylinder in due course of time which was already booked. The Opposite Party No.1(one)'s statement is that, he has provided proper service to his consumer on the next day of booking. Here it is to see that who's statement is correct. The Complainant has challenged the delivery of the filled cylinder on Dt.27/02/2009 in shape of affidavit and also filed the Consumer Receipt Book which does not shows the delivery date on Dt. 27/02/2009. To counter this the Opposite Party has not filed any documents to strengthen his case. Hence, the Opposite Party No.1(one) is failed to prove that he is running his trade practice fairly and is not deficient in providing proper service to his consumers. In these circumstances, the complaint petition is allowed. The Opposite Party No.2(two) is not found deficient in providing service towards the Complainant. The Opposite Parties are directed to give the delivery of the cooking gas to the customers in proper time. The Opposite Party No.1(one) is directed to pay Rs.1,500/-(Rupees one thousand five hundred)only to the Complainant towards mental agony and litigation cost within thirty days hence, failing which the awarded amount shall carry 18%(eighteen percent) interest per annum till payment. Complaint allowed accordingly.




......................MISS BHAGYALAXMI DORA
......................SHRI GOURI SHANKAR PRADHAN