DATE OF FILING : 13.1.2010.

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 28^th day of May, 2010

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No.243/2009

Between

Complainants : 1. Sabu Joseph (Jose Joseph)

S/o Joseph,

Ponnamattathil House,

Kudayathoor P.O.,

Thodupuzha, Idukki District.

2. Shibu Joseph (Aloshy)

S/o Joseph,

Ponnamattathil House,

Kudayathoor P.O.,

Thodupuzha, Idukki District.

3. Joseph, S/o Ouseph,

Ponnamattathil House,

Kudayathoor P.O.,

Thodupuzha, Idukki District.

(All by Adv: Prince J. Pananal)

And

Opposite Parties : 1. The Chief Area Manager,

Indane Area Office,

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,

Panampilli Nagar,

Cochin – 36,

Ernakulam District.

2. The Manager,

Geo Gas (Distributor Code No.4597420)

Nedumpara Building,

Olamattam, Thodupuzha,

Idukki District.

(By Advs: K.J. Thomas &

Sijimon K. Augastine)

O R D E R

SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHANAN (PRESIDENT)
 

The 1^st complainant had a domestic gas connection vide consumer No.4867, since 1993. At the time of availing the said connection, complainants were residing under the same roof at Thodupuzha. The connection was availed in the name of first complainant, as he was managing the domestic affairs at that time. The 3^rd complainant is the father of 1^st and 2^nd complainants. The connection had duly endorsed in the family ration card. Thereafter the 1^st complainant started to reside separately from his family house along with his wife and daughters. At this juncture he applied for a separate temporary ration card which was issued accordingly. First complainant also applied for another domestic gas connection with the opposite parties and it was sanctioned as customer No.21659 with a customer card bearing No.851114. Now the first complainant separately and 2^nd and 3^rd complainants jointly are issued with separate ration card for the year 2008 to the year 2012. In both these cards the fact of LPG connection is noted in the concerned columns. The first complainant’s card number is 162874791 and the 2^nd and 3^rd complainant’s card number is 1628058821. The 2^nd opposite party supplied the gas cylinders in route delivery system. The complainants had been receiving their respective cylinders separately till April 2008. Thereafter the route manager of the 2^nd opposite party informed the complainants that, it will not be possible to supply separate gas cylinders to both the family, since both the connections are in the name of the 1^st complainant. Then the 2^nd complainant sent a request to the first opposite party for changing the customer card No.4867 in favour of him. Even though the opposite parties received the said request for changing the customer name, they did not make any reply or did not take any steps to redress the grievance of the complainant. As the facts being this, the first complainant received a letter from the 2^nd opposite party informing that the 2^nd cylinder is ready for releasing as per the registration No.21098 dated 6.10.2006. It is also informed in the letter that the first complainant has to contact the 2^nd opposite party along with the enlisted documents in the said letter. The said letter was received by the 1^st complainant on 17.11.2009. On receipt of this letter, the 1^st complainant has approached the 2^nd opposite party along with the necessary documents on 11.12.2009. But the 2^nd opposite party neglected to issue the 2^nd cylinder stating that it is not possible because, two connections are standing in the name of the 1^st complainant. It is the duty of the opposite party to conduct enquiry on the 2^nd complainant’s letter to change the name of customer in the domestic card or to response on the same in a positive manner. But they have not taken any steps on this letter. Moreover the opposite parties not yet informed the 1^st complainant that he is not eligible for a 2^nd customer card in his name while they received the new connection charges of Rs.1634.60 and issued the registration slip of the 2^nd cylinder. Out of the total amount collected Rs.115/- has collected as service and processing charges. The 2^nd opposite party is liable to inform the prevailing rules of domestic gas supply as well as to change the name of the customer in the domestic card. The LPG gas connection issued on the basis of family ration card. Each and every family, which holds a ration card is entitled to get a connection for the purpose of domestic use of the concerned family. Now the 1^st complainant is living separately and the 2^nd complainant assigned to look after the 3^rd complainant and the family. Hence the request of the 2^nd complainant dated 24.5.2008 should be honoured by the opposite parties and they have no right to deny the gas connection as well as 2^nd cylinder to the 1^st complainant and such acts of the opposite parties amouts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. So this petition is filed for directing the opposite party to change the name of the customer in the customer card, to direct the opposite party to provide 2^nd cylinder as well as route refill system to the 1^st complainant and also for compensation.

2. A written version is filed by the 2^nd opposite party, who is only an authorised agent/licensee of the 1^st opposite party and is acting purely as per the guidelines, directions and circulars issued by the 1^st opposite party from time to time. This opposite party cannot act illegally or cannot go beyond the directions and circulars issued by the 1^st opposite party. The petitioner admits that there were two LPG connections in the name of the petitioner bearing No.4867 with 2 cylinders and No.21659 with one cylinder. Section 3 of the Liquified Petroleum Gas Regulation of Supply and Distribution Order 2000 reads as follows:- “Restriction of unauthorised possession, supply and consumption of Liquified Petroleum Gas”:-

1. A person having connection for liquified petroleum gas under the public distribution system shall not :

(a) Possess more than one connection of Liquified petroleum gas granted under the Public distribution system.

 Further more, this opposite party has received circular No.1/2009-10 from the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., dated 20.5.2009 regarding general guidelines and operating proceedings for distributors with letter format. Point No.8, in the circular deals with multiple connections which states as per existing rules governing domestic LPG, a person should not hold more than one connection of any oil company in his/her name.

Another circular which this opposite party received from the Indian Oil Corporation dated 19.7.2005 regarding proceedings to release new connections, it is directed that new connections are to be released only to those persons do not already have LPG connections of any of the PSU oil companies. Another circular No.11/2007-08 dated 30.1.2008 by the 1^st opposite party directed this opposite party to take immediate action to eliminate duplicate booking by customer already having DBC (Double Bottle Connection). The opposite party suspended the LPG connection of the 1^st petitioner with consumer No.21659 as per the direction of the Deputy Manager of the 1^st opposite party on account of multiple connection in the same name. This opposite party is unable to release 2^nd connection since the 1^st opposite party has given instruction to cancel multiple connections in one name. Without direction from the 1^st opposite party, who is the master of the 2^nd opposite party, this opposite party is unable to release the 2^nd connection to the petitioners. The complainant has given undertaking to the extent that he is having only one connection. When the application of the 1^st petitioner got priority, letter was sent by the 2^nd opposite party and connection also was issued in his name. Again on the basis of seniority this opposite party issued letter to the petitioner for issuance of 2^nd cylinder. In the meanwhile this opposite party received circular No.1/2009-10 dated 20.5.2009 from the 1^st opposite party with direction that a person should not hold more than one connection of any oil company in his/her name. On verification it is revealed that the 1^st petitioner is having 2 LPG connections in his name. The 2^nd opposite party suspended the 2^nd connection of the 1^st petitioner as per the direction and circular of the 1^st opposite party. This opposite party is ready to give multiple connection to the petitioner, if the 1^st opposite party, the master of the 2^nd opposite party gives direction or circular to issue multiple connection to the petitioner. So there is no deficiency in the part of the 2^nd opposite party.

3. The 1^st opposite party was absent and called exparte.

4. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?

5. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P10 marked on the side of the complainant. No oral evidence is adduced by the opposite party and Exts.R1 to R4 marked on the side of the opposite parties.

6. The POINT :- The 1^st complainant was having 2 LPG domestic connections in the name of him in two separate ration cards. But one of this connection was using in his family house and the other one is used in the petitioner’s residence. The petitioner had filed application for changing the name of the 1^st connection to the 2^nd petitioner’s name. The opposite party neglected the same and 2^nd connection of the complainant was disconnected. The complainant was examined as PW1. The complainant availed an LPG connection in the year 1993 from the 2^nd opposite party at the time when the 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd complainants were residing under the same roof. The family affairs were looking after by the 1^{st o}pposite party because the 3^rd complainant is an age old man. The connection was duly endorsed in the ration card at that time. Ext.P1 is the copy of the said ration card as No.1628058821. The LPG connection is also endorsed in the ration card. Copy of the domestic customer card issued by the 2^nd opposite party in the name of the 1^st complainant on 26.10.1993 as consumer No.9519498 is marked as Ext.P2. PW1 shifted his residence with his wife and children to Kudayathoor. So he applied for separate ration card in his name with wife and children and it was allowed. And so an application for a fresh LPG connection was also applied in the 2^nd ration card. Ext.P3 is the copy of the separate temporary ration card issued in the name of the complainant with his wife Tessy and children Reshma and Renjitha. The domestic gas customer card as No.851114 issued to the complainant on behalf of the 2^nd ration card as No.002240 is marked as Ext.P4. After that another permanent ration card was issued to the complainant as card No.1628074791 with members Sabu Joseph, wife Tessy Sabu, daughters Reshma Jose and Renjitha Jose which is marked as Ext.P5. Another ration card was issued to the 2^nd and 3^rd complainants for their residence which is marked as Ext.P6. In it the members are Joseph, wife Thressya and son Alloshy with No.1628058821. 2^nd opposite party was duly issuing refilled cylinders to the complainants in route delivery system upto April, 2008. After when the route manager directed that they cannot issue cylinders to the complainant’s residence because two of the connections were taken in name of the 1^st complainant. So 2^nd complainant filed a request before the 1^st opposite party to change the old LPG connection in the name of the 2^nd complainant who is looking after the family matters then on 24.5.2008. That was received by the 1^st opposite party. Ext.P7 is the copy of the letter issued by the 2^nd complainant to the Chief Area Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.. Ext. P8 is the copy of the postal acknowledgement card for receipt of the Ext.P7. But no action has been taken by the 1^st and 2^nd opposite party for the same. At that time a letter was issued by the 2^nd opposite party to the complainant stating that the additional cylinder is sanctioned in the name of the complainant on 17.11.2009. PW1 approached with relevant documents to 2^nd opposite party. But they neglected to issue the same because the complainant is having 2 LPG connections in the same name. Ext.P9 is the letter issued from the 2^nd opposite party to PW1 requested to contact them within 30 days to release the 2^nd additional cylinder. The 2^nd opposite party charged Rs.1634.60/- and service and processing charge Rs.115/- from the complainant for issuing the 2^nd LPG connection to the complainant. They told to produce fresh ration card. PW1 produced the new ration card. The copy of the subscription voucher of the 2^nd LPG connection is marked as Ext.P10 (series). The learned counsel for the 2^nd opposite party cross examined the complainant, copy of the affidavit executed by the complainant before availing the 2^nd LPG connection dated 6.10.2006 is marked as Ext.R1. The circular issued from the 1^st opposite party to the 2^nd opposite party dated 20.5.2009 is marked as Ext.R2. The circular issued on 19.7.2005 is marked as Ext.R3 and circular issued on 30.1.2008 is marked as Ext.R4.

As per the opposite party, the 1^st opposite party has issued a circular to the 2^nd opposite party because the first opposite party has revealed that PW1 is having 2 gas connections. The complainant availed the 2^nd connection by mis-leading the 2^nd opposite party. The 2^nd opposite party is not responsible for any act of the 1^st opposite party. The application for changing the name of the connection which is Ext.P7 has been given to the 1^st opposite party, as per the directions of the 1^st opposite party. The 2^nd opposite party denied to issue the 2^nd additional cylinder to the complainant. The 2^nd opposite party is ready to issue the additional cylinder to the complainant if they are directed by the 1^st opposite party.
 

It is admitted by the complainant that there are 2 LPG domestic gas connections in the name of the 1^st complainant. But the 1^st connection was obtained in the year 1993 when he was living with his brother and father in his Tharavattu house with the ration card of the family house in which the 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd complainants are the members. After that the complainant with his wife and children shifted to another house at Kudayathoor and applied for a separate ration card. Ext.P5, separate ration card is received by the 1^st complainant with members his wife and 2 children. So in order to get a gas connection for his day to day life, he applied for a separate gas connection with the separate ration card in the year 2006 and that was allotted by the 2^nd opposite party after receiving an affidavit from the complainant which is Ext.R1. Ext.P10 is the copy of the subscription voucher received for the payment for the 2^nd connection from the 2^nd opposite party dated 6.10.2006. The complainant was obtaining the refilled cylinder in the route delivery system. The 2^nd opposite party also intimated the complainant to receive the additional cylinder, when the 1^st complainant approached for the same, they denied the same and stated that 1^st opposite party directed them to do so because the complainant is having two LPG connections. In Ext.R2 circular produced by the opposite party,
 

it is written as clause 8, that “Multiple connections: As per the existing rules governing domestic LPG, a person should not hold more than one connection of any oil company in his/her name. Also, it is unsafe to have more than one connection in the same kitchen. More than one domestic connection held by an individual or in one kitchen / address fall under the category of multiple connections”.
 

And it is instructed to the 2^nd opposite party by the 1^st opposite party to enquire about the multiple connections and as per the Section 3 of the Liquified Petroleum Gas Order 2000 (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) a person having connection for liquified petroleum gas under the public distribution system shall not possess more than one connection of liquified petroleum gas granted under the Public distribution system. It is written in that circular that the officers of the 1^st opposite party also identified the list of multiple connections under the heads of the ’same name’ and ’same address’ and the 2^nd opposite party is advised by the 1^st opposite party to confirm the address of such customers. As per circular 30.1.2008 about the release of DBCs, additional cylinders, it is written that a perusal of DBC waiting list of some of the distributorships has revealed that many such bookings can be termed “bogus” due to the following reasons which have mentioned as if duplicate booking by customers already having a DBC.
 

So the complainant is having an additional cylinder with the 1^st connection and again an additional cylinder cannot be distributed to the 1^st complainant. So that the 2^nd additional cylinder was denied by the opposite party.
 

But we think that Ext.R1 affidavit prepared on 6.10.2006 for the receipt of the 2^nd connection, says that “ I Shri. Sabu Joseph, resident of Ponnamattathil (H),VII/305, Kudayathoor, affirm that I am not in possession of an LPG connection from any Oil Company. So it is mentioned in the affidavit prepared by the 1^st complainant that he is not in possession of any LPG connection. There was an LPG connection in his name and it was used in his “Tharavattu house”, now he is not in possession of any LPG connection in his residence. Ext.R2 circular gave guidelines to the distributors, are directed to take necessary action in the multiple connection and confirm the name and address of such multiple connection customers. But the complainant, when his 2^nd additional cylinder was denied by the 2^nd opposite party, 2^nd complainant applied to change the name of the connection to the 2^nd complainant because 1^st complainant already shifted the house to another address with his wife and children. That application was received by the 1^st opposite party which is acknowledged by the 1^st opposite party, and it is marked as Exts.P7 and P8 respectively. 2^nd connection was received by the complainant to his residence at house No.90, ward No.VII of Kudayathoor Panchayath. It is clear from Ext.P5 ration card. The 1^st connection availed in the family address which is house No.305, ward No. VII of  Kudayathoor Panchayath, in which his brother, father and mother are residing now. It is very clear from the Ext.P5 ration card that 1^st complainant is residing separately from his family and he is living with his wife and 2 children. It is also very clear from Ext.P2, the customer card issued by the opposite party in the year 16.6.1995, the customer’s name and address is written as Mr. Sabu Joseph, Ponnamattathil, ward No.VI/187, Olamattam, Thodupuzha. But in the Ext.P10 subscription voucher issued to PW1 on 6.10.2006, the address is Mr. Sabu Joseph, Ponnamattathil, ward No.VII/305, Kudayathoor P.O.. So the connection issued by the opposite party as per Ext.P10 and Ext.P2 are quiet different. It means that the complainant already shifted his residence and he is in need of a gas connection. The opposite party also issued an additional cylinder to the complainant. 2^nd opposite party never confirmed the address of the 1^st complainant, whether includes in a multiple connection and the need of an additional cylinder was denied by the opposite party. It is a gross deficiency in service, in the part of the opposite party.
 

The gas connection was availed by the 1^st complainant in the address of his old residence, after that he shifted his residence to a separate house and he applied for changing the address in the customer card. He also obtained a separate ration card. LPG connection is very essential for an ordinary man for his day to day life. It is denied by the opposite party only because he applied in the same address. He had applied for changing his name and it was not done by the opposite party. The complainant suffered a lot because of the non-availability of LPG connection. The 2^nd opposite party denied the additional gas cylinder to the complainant and cancelled the connection of the complainant as per the direction of the 1^st opposite party. 2^nd opposite party is ready to give connection to the complainant if there is a direction from the 1^st opposite party.
 

Hence the petition allowed. We direct 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties to change the name of the customer card No.9519498 (customer No.4867) as Shibu Joseph instead of Sabu Joseph as per the Exts.P7 and P8. The opposite parties are also directed to provide 2^nd additional cylinder as well as route refill system to the 1^st complainant as per the card No.851114 (customer No.21659) without any interruption. The 1^st opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation for the deficiency of service of the opposite party and for the hardship caused by the complainant because of the non-availability of the gas connection. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as cost of this petition within one month of receipt of a copy of this order failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.
 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28^th day of May, 2010.
 

Sd/-

SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)

Sd/-

SMT. SHEELA JACOB (MEMBER)
 

Sd/-

SMT. BINDU SOMAN (MEMBER)
 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1 - Sabu Joseph

On the side of the Opposite party :

Nil.

Exhibits :

Ext.P1 - Copy of the ration card No.1628058821

Ext.P2 - Copy of the domestic customer card of customer No.4867 and consumerNo.9519498.

Ext.P3 - Copy of the temporary ration card No.002240.

Ext.P4 - Copy of the domestic customer card of consumer No.851114.

Ext.P5 - Copy of the ration card No.1628074791.

Ext.P6 - Copy of the ration card No.1628058821.

Ext.P7 - Copy of the letter issued by the 2^nd complainant to the Chief Area Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Cochi.

Ext.P8 - Copy of the postal acknowledgement card for the receipt of Ext.P7.

Ext.P9 - Copy of the letter issued by the 2^nd opposite party to the complainant.

Ext.P10 (series) - Copy of the subscription voucher, cash bill and indane customer registration slip of the new LPG connection, issued from Indian Oil Corporation Ltd..

On the side of the Opposite party :

Ext.R1 - Copy of the affidavit executed by the complainant before availing the 2^nd LPG connection, dated 6.10.2006.

Ext.R2 - Copy of the circular No.01/2009-10 dated 20.5.2009 issued from the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Kerala State Office.

Ext.R3 - Copy of the circular No.CAO/S/08 dated 19.7.2005, issued from the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Cochin Area Office.

Ext.R4 - Copy of the circular No.11/2007-08 dated 30.1.2008, issued from the Indane Area Office, Chochi.