West Bengal

Kolkata-I(North)

CC/188/2015

Abdul Halim - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chandrima Enterprises and another - Opp.Party(s)

15 Mar 2017

ORDER

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata - I (North)
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
Web-site - confonet.nic.in
 
Complaint Case No. CC/188/2015
 
1. Abdul Halim
61/B, Diamond Harbour Road, P.S. - Ekbalpur, Kolkata - 700023.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Chandrima Enterprises and another
8D, Gangadhar Banerjee Lane, P.S. - Watgunge, Kolkata - 700023.
2. Chief Regional Officer,
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Purbachal Bhawan, 771, Anandapur, 2nd Floor, E.M.Bypass, Kolkata - 700101.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Sambhunath Chatterjee PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sk. Abul Answar MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 15 Mar 2017
Final Order / Judgement

Order No.  11  dt.  15/03/2017

       The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is the consumer of LPG gas cylinder and he gets delivery of gas cylinder of the shop of o.p. no.1. The complainant booked one refill cylinder from o.p. no.1 on 11.12.13. But the refill cylinder was brought for delivery before consumption of the entire gas of the earlier cylinder provided by o.p. no.1. The complainant in such position requested the delivery man to deliver the cylinder afterwards. But no action was taken on behalf of o.p. no.1. The complainant booked another cylinder on 29.1.14, but o.p. no.1 declined to deliver the refill cylinder. The complainant brought to the notice of o.p. no.2 but no action was taken by o.p. no.2, for which the complainant filed this case praying for restoration of the supply of refill gas cylinder and also for compensation of Rs.50,000/- and Rs.5000/- for litigation cost.

            Both  o.ps. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. The o.p. no.1 stated that the delivery man of o.p. no.1 went to deliver the filled cylinder on 5.3.14 and requested the complainant to return the empty cylinder after paying the price of the refill cylinder but the complainant did not return any empty cylinder to the delivery man and assaulted the delivery man. On the basis of the said fact o.p. no.1 made a GD Entry at Ekbalpur P.S. and the said fact was also informed to the General Manager, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. The o.p. no.1 specifically stated that he was ready to deliver the refill gas cylinder on payment of the price of the same and also complainant must return the empty gas cylinder. Since there was no deficiency in service o.p. no.1 prayed for dismissal of the case.

            The o.p. no.2 stated that the complainant took delivery of a filled gas cylinder but refused to pay the price and abused and manhandled the delivery boy and did not return the empty cylinder for which the dealer had to lodge a complaint. The o.p. no.2 further stated that in order to harass the o.p. no.2 this case was filed and accordingly o.p. no.2 prayed for dismissal of the case.

            On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:

  1. Whether the complainant is a consumer of LPG gas connection.
  2. Whether the complainant provided the empty cylinder to the delivery man.
  3. Whether the complainant refused to hand over the empty cylinder at the time of receiving the filled gas cylinder.
  4. Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.
  5. Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

Decision with reasons:

            All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.

            Ld. lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant is a consumer of LPG gas and the o.p. no.1 is the agency to supply the gas to the complainant. The complainant while received the filled cylinder he noticed that the earlier cylinder was not empty for which the delivery man of o.p. no.1 wanted to get the said cylinder which the complainant refused to deliver. Subsequently the complainant booked gas but o.p. no.1 did not supply the same for which the complainant filed this case with the allegation of deficiency in service and other reliefs.

            Ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that while the delivery man of o.p. no.1 went to deliver the filled gas cylinder the complainant refused to hand over the empty gas cylinder for which a hot altercation took place and the delivery man  was assaulted for which the o.p. no.1 lodged a GD at Ekbalpur P.S. and informed the said incident to o.p. no.2. The o.p. no.1 never wanted to stop the gas supply but it is the legal obligation of the complainant to hand over the empty cylinder at the time of receiving of refill cylinder. But the complainant without following the said legal obligation took the law in his hand and assaulted the delivery boy for which such misunderstanding cropped up. Since there was non compliance of the rules and regulations of consumer of a gas in case of having double cylinder he should deliver the empty cylinder at the time of receiving the refilled cylinder but the complainant failed to comply the same for which o.ps. cannot be held responsible for deficiency in service.

            On the basis of the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant is a consumer of LPG gas and o.p. no.1 is the supplier of the gas cylinder and from the facts and circumstances of the case it appears that there was some untoward incident between the complainant and delivery man of o.p. no.1 relating to not handing over the empty cylinder to the delivery man at the time of receiving the filled gas cylinder. The said fact led to allegation made by both the parties against each other. Since the gas is an essential service and the complainant cannot be deprived of providing the gas supply but on the contrary the complainant should abide by rules and regulations for getting supply of the gas from o.p. no.1. Since the complainant failed to hand over the empty cylinder the trouble broke out between them. Accordingly we hold that the complainant should hand over the empty cylinder at the time of receiving the filled cylinder from o.p. no.1 after making necessary payment and after getting clearance from the authority the o.p. no.1 should release the cylinder immediately and if it is found that there was any impediment in consumption of gas by the complainant the o.p. no.1 should assist the complainant for removal of such impediment.  Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the CC No.188/2015 is allowed on contest without cost against the o.ps. The complainant is directed to book the gas cylinder as per the norms prevailing at present and whenever the filled gas cylinder will be delivered by the o.p. no.1 he should hand over the empty cylinder to the delivery man on payment of the price prevailing at that time of receiving the filled gas cylinder to the delivery man. The o.p. no.1 should provide the gas supply to the complainant without committing any delay.        

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sambhunath Chatterjee]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sk. Abul Answar]
MEMBER

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.