Kerala

StateCommission

A/15/943

M/S SREENARAYANA INDANE SERVICES - Complainant(s)

Versus

CHANDRIKA - Opp.Party(s)

C S RAJMOHAN

29 Sep 2016

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION  VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO.943/15

JUDGMENT DATED:29.09.2016

 

PRESENT : 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI                         :  PRESIDENT

SHRI.V.V. JOSE                                                          : MEMBER

 

M/s Sree Narayana Indane Services,

IV/168, Anugraha,

Thekkemuri, Pattambi,                                                      : APPELLANT

Palakkad. R/by Manager.

 

(By Adv: Sri. V.K. Haridas)

 

            Vs.

Chandrika, W/o Narayanan,

Karippali, Karambathur P.O,

Ottappalam, Palakkad.

                                                                                                : RESPONDENTS

M/s Indane, R/by A.N. Sha,

Executive Director (LPG),

Indane Oil Bhavan, G.9. Ali Yavar Jung Marg,

Bandra East, Mumbai.

 

JUDGMENT

HON.JUSTICE.P.Q.BARKATHALI : PRESIDENT

 

This is an appeal filed by the 2^nd opposite party in CC.111/13 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Palakkad challenging the order of the Forum dated, August 26, 2015 directing the opposite parties to replace the gas cylinder supplied to the complainant with a new fully filled gas cylinder of good quality and to pay a compensation of Rs.5,000/- and a cost of Rs.5000/-.

2.      The case of the complainant as testified by PW1 and as detailed in the complaint before the Forum in brief is this:-

Complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties bearing consumer No.18223.  Second opposite party supplied domestic LP Gas cylinder to the complainant on January 04, 2013.  The delivery boy supplied the cylinder and took back the empty cylinder and complainant paid the amount as per the bill.  When the complainant took the cylinder for using, it was found to be empty.  The seal of the cylinder was not broken.  When the complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party he insulted her.  Therefore complainant filed the complaint seeking a compensation of Rs.5,000/- and a cost.

3.      First opposite party is M/s Indane represented by its Executive Director Bombay.  Second opposite party is M/s Sree Narayana Indian Services, Pattambi, Palakkad.  First opposite party remained absent before the Forum.  Second opposite party in their version contended thus before the Forum.  It is admitted that cylinder was supplied on January 04, 2013. Complainant booked the next cylinder on February 05, 2013 which was taken on delivery in March 25, 2013.  But it was returned since there was no empty cylinder.  On April 05, 2013 complainant reported that the cylinder is empty and the next cylinder was delivered on April 11, 2013 itself.  Delivery of the next cylinder could not be effected on May 18, 2013 and May 19, 2013 as there was no empty cylinder.  The allegation of the complainant that the cylinder delivered on October 29, 2012 was not replaced till April 11, 2013 is unbelievable.  Therefore complaint has to be dismissed.

4.      The power of attorney holder of the complainant was examined as PW1.  He produced Exts.A1 to A3 and on the side of the 2^nd opposite party DW1 was examined and Exts.B1 and B2 were marked before the Forum.  The report of the commissioner was marked as Ext.C1.  On an appreciation of evidence Forum found that there was deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and directed them to replace gas cylinder of the complainant with a new filled gas cylinder of good quality and to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation and Rs.5000/- as cost.  Second opposite party has now come up in appeal challenging the said order of the Forum.

5.      Before admitting the appeal the counsel for the appellant was heard.

The following points arise for consideration:-

1. Whether there was any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the impugned order of the Forum can be sustained?

 

6.      The case of the complainant is that 2^nd opposite party contended that the cylinder supplied by them was not an empty cylinder.  During the pendency of the complaint the complainant produced gas cylinder before the Forum and prayed for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to inspect the disputed cylinder.  The Advocate Commissioner inspected the cylinder and filed his report Ext.C1.  The Advocate commissioner found the gas cylinder was empty but the safety seal of the gas cylinder was intact and not at all opened.  The upper side of the gas cylinder wherein the regulator was fixed the entire valve gas outlet completely damaged due to rust.  It is clear from the above that gas cylinder supplied by the 2^nd opposite party was empty and defective.  Therefore Forum is perfectly justified in accepting the case of the complainant and directing the opposite parties to replace the defective gas cylinder with a new one and to pay a compensation of Rs.5000/- and a cost of Rs.5000/-.  Therefore we find no ground to admit the appeal.

In the result we find no ground to admit the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed in the admission stage itself.

 

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI       :  PRESIDENT

 

 

V.V. JOSE : MEMBER

 

VL.