Present: 1. Sri.P.K.Sasi, President.
2. Smt. Sheena.V.V., Member.
3. Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar, Member
18th day of February 2017
C.C.43/15 filed on 28/10/14
Complainant : Secretary (C.S. Thilakan), Applicants and
Consumers Forum Reg. 526196,
Lakshmi Watch House, East Nada,
Kodungalloor, Pin – 680 664.
(By Adv. K.G. Satheesan, Irinjalakkuda)
Opposite Parties : 1) Chief Area Manager,
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,
Indane Area Office, 2nd floor, PMK Towers,
Civil Station Road P.O., Wayanad Road,
Kozhikode – 673 020.
2) Licensee, Mrs. Rajitha Menon,
Sree Vinayaka Indane Services,
North Nada, Kodungalloor – 680 664.
(By Adv. A.D. Benny, Thrissur for R2)
O R D E R
By Sri.P.K,.Sasi, President
The complaint is filed by the Secretary of a Forum established for the protection of the consumers, with the authorization of one Mr. Vijayakumar. The case of the complainant is that Mr. Vijayakumar applied with the 2nd opposite party to transfer LPG Connection into his name, as legal heir, after the death of his mother. For that the 2nd opposite party collected Rs.2,170/- as difference in deposit and transferred the LPG connection of his mother into his name. The 2nd opposite party acted so only with the consent and knowledge of 1st opposite party and the act of the opposite parties is against to the policy of Central Petroleum Ministry and by misleading the consumer they made unauthorized and undue gain from the consumer. Taking all these matter the complainant has made several enquiries and communications with the Central Petroleum Ministry and other concerned offices. All the result of those communications affirmed that the opposite party has committed illegal act against the policy of the Government.
2) As per the Central Petroleum Ministry’s policy to transfer LPG connection to the name of legal heirs no charge can be collected from the customers except the legal records needed. Moreover, instead of the head ‘others’ they ought to have been mentioned as legal heirs in the SV.
3) Since the act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service as well as utter unfair trade practice, the complainant has issued notice on 14/08/14. Whereas, the opposite parties, even after accepting the notice, neither sent any reply nor made any attempt to correct their illegal acts by returning the amount collected from the customer concerned. Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief. On receiving complaint notice was issued to both the opposite parties and even after accepting the notice the 1st opposite party neither appeared before the Forum nor submitted any version. Hence set ex-parte. The 2nd opposite party entered appearance through counsel and filed version. In their version they denied all the allegations stated in the complaint. According to the contesting opposite party the connection transferred into the name of Vijayakumar was only by availing all the legal formalities and they collected only legally permitted amount from him. The 2nd opposite party further submitted that it is written as others in S.V was correct and it was not possible to mention as legal heirs. They further submitted that the complainant has not produced legal heirship certificate. The 2nd opposite party further submitted that after receiving the notice all these facts were properly convinced the complainant and they have not committed any sort of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice.
4) Then the case was posted for evidence and the points for consideration was that
1) wheter there was any unfair trade practice or
deficiency in service happened on the part of
opposite parties ?
2) If so what cost and relief ?
5) From the side of complainant the Secretary has appeared before the Forum and filed proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and explained all the averments stated in the complaint in detail. He also produced 23 documents which are marked as Ext.P1 to P23. Ext. P1 is the By law of the Complainant’s Forum; Ext. P2 is the copy of Death Certificate of Padmavathy; Ext. P3 is the copy of complaint submitted by Vijayakumar; Ext. P4 the copy of Lawyer Notice sent to the opposite parties dtd.12/08/14; Ext. P5 is the copy of A/D cards (2 Nos); Ext. P6 is the copy of Ration Card of Padmavathy; Ext. P7 is the copy of subscription voucher; Ext. P8 is the copy of complaint submitted before district supply officer; Ext. P9 copy of complaint submitted before the Indian Oil Corporation; Ext. P10 is the copy of complaint submitted by the complainant’s Society; Ext. P11 is the copy of letter received from Taluk Supply Office; Ext. P12 copy of policy circular; Ext. P13 copy of complaint sent to the Chief Area Manager of IOC; Ext. P14 reply mail received from Manager; Ext. P15 copy of reply received from Hindustan Petroleum Corporation; Ext. P16 copy of letter received from Indian Oil Corporation; Ext. P17 copy of letter received from Manager; Ext. P18 copy of letter sent to Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas; Ext. P19 copy of Minutes of Complainant’s Forum; Ext. P20 copy of Certificate of Registration; Ext. P21 reply received from Assistant Manager, Supplico Depo, Kozhikode; Ext. P22 copy of document received from Indian Oil Corporation, Kozhikode divisiom and Ext. P23 reply received under RTI Act from Indian Oil Corporation. From the side of 2nd opposite party, authorized person one Mr. Raghunathan appeared before the Forum and submitted counter proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and described all the contentions raised in their version in detail. He also filed an additional counter proof affidavit and produced 3 documents which are marked as Ext. R1 to R3. Ext. R1 copy of letter issued by Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas; Ext. R2 series application form and documents submitted by Vijayakumar and Ext. R3 copy of Subscription voucher.
6) Both sides filed detailed argument notes and we heard in detail also. The learned counsel for the complainant vehemently and elaborately argued the situation persisting in our area, from the side LPG distribution agencies. The counsel strongly argued that the agencies are making undue gain from the customers by misrepresenting the facts with threat. Here in this case one Mr. Vijayakumar being a legal heir of his deceased mother applied for transferring the LPG connection, existed in his mother’s name with the 2nd opposite party, into his name. Whereas, the opposite party illegally collected an amount of Rs.2,170/- from him. Moreover, in the service voucher instead of writing ‘legal heir’ the 2nd opposite party written an ‘others’. Whereas, the 2nd opposite party contented that they acted only as per the legal norms and conditions prevailing and no unauthorized amount collected from Vijayakumar. They transferred the connection only after complying the legal formalities. The entry made in the service voucher was correct since no legal heirship certificate is produced by Vijayakumar.
7) We have gone through the documents produced from complainant as well as 2nd opposite party. The 23 documents produced from the side of complainant would go to show that the Consumers and Applicant Forum who is the complainant in this case has taken very cautious follow up actions with regarding the malpractices committed by various LPG agencies including the 2nd opposite party. The Ext. P11 document would go to show that the LPG connection has to be transferred into the name of legal heirs without collecting any fees. As per the rules and regulations issued by the concerned Ministry it is also very evident from the documents produced from the side of complainant that the 2nd opposite party has collected an unauthorized amount of Rs.2,170/- for transferring the LPG connection from the name of deceased Padmavathy Amma into the name of her son Vijayakumar. The letters issued by the manager shows that they have known that the Indian Oil Corporation has already issued required directions and instruction to the 2nd opposite party to take necessary corrective actions within a week to resolve the issue to the satisfaction of the customer. That was not done by the 2nd opposite party.
8) The 1st opposite party being the Chief Area Manager of Indian Oil Corporation who is the responsible person to look after all such dealings of concerned agencies like 2nd opposite party. Here the 1st opposite party even after accepting the notice neglected the notice and did not respond to the notice, that itself amounts to utter unfair act committed by the 1st opposite party and also amounts to abuse of the process of the Forum. It has to be stopped. Being the authorized public servant the Chief Area Manager has to appear before the Forum and submit his reply to the complaint. He is the person who has to say what is the real things to be done by the agencies and whether the agencies has committed any sort of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice or not. That was not done by the 1st opposite party.
9) The 2nd opposite party could not properly reply the averments stated in the complaint as well as to the documents produced from the side of complainant. Considering all these points we are of the opinion that the 2nd opposite party has collected Rs.2,170/- illegally and unauthorisedly from the complainant and also written in the subscription voucher as others instead of writing as legal heir and thereby the 2nd opposite party has committed unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service towards the complainant. The 1st opposite party being the authorized and responsible person to rectify the mistakes committed by the 2nd opposite party, without taking any proper and effective actions, entertained the 2nd opposite party to continue such mischiefs towards the consumers. Thereby the 1st opposite party is also committed utter deficiency in service on their part. There are so many consumers who suppressed similar grievances unchallenged either due to lack of awareness or due to lack of time. We would like to appreciate the Applicants and Consumers Forum, who has brought this complaint before this Forum, for their sincere and responsible actions taken and the strains they suffered for the protection of the consumers.
In the result, we allow this complaint and the 2nd opposite party is directed to return Rs.2,170/- (Rupees Two thousand one hundred and seventy only) to Mr. Vijayakumar and also to issue fresh subscription voucher, with mentioning as legal heir instead of others, along with Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as cost of this complaint to the complainant Forum within one month from receiving copy of this order. The 1st opposite party is directed to remit Rs.10,000/- towards the legal benefit fund of this Forum as punitive cost and compensation for deficiency in service as well as disobedience shown towards the Forum by not responding to the notice issued. The 1st opposite party is directed to deposit this amount within one month from receiving copy of this order. We also direct the 1st opposite party to issue strict directions to all their agencies not to commit such mischieves in future and to monitor it regularly.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 18th day of February 2017.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
M.P.Chandrakumar Sheena.V.V. P.K.Sasi, Member Member President.
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext. P1 By law of the Complainant’s Forum
Ext. P2 copy of Death Certificate of Padmavathy
Ext. P3 copy of complaint
Ext. P4 copy of Lawyer Notice dtd.12/08/14
Ext. P5 copy of A/D cards (2 Nos)
Ext. P6 copy of Ration Card Padmavathy
Ext. P7 copy of subscription voucher
Ext. P8 copy of complaint
Ext. P9 copy of complaint
Ext. P10 copy of complaint
Ext. P11 copy of letter received from Taluk Supply Office
Ext. P12 copy of policy circular
Ext. P13 copy of complaint
Ext. P14 reply mail received from Manager
Ext. P15 copy of reply
Ext. P16 copy of letter
Ext. P17 copy of letter
Ext. P18 copy of letter
Ext. P19 copy of Minutes of Complainant’s Forum
Ext. P20 copy of Certificate of Registration
Ext. P21 reply received
Ext. P22 copy of document
Ext. P23 reply received under RTI Act
Opposite parties’ Exhibits
Ext. R1 copy of letter
Ext. R2 series application form and documents
Ext. R3 copy of Subscription voucher.
Id/-
President
