Rajasthan

StateCommission

A/168/2017

Vishnu Gas Agency - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dharma Ram s/o Gheesa Ram - Opp.Party(s)

Vizzy Agarwal

11 May 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 168 /2017

 

Vishnu Gas Agency, Prem Nagar, Mora Road, Merta city, Distt. Nagaur through Prop. Harendra Singh Shekhawat

Vs.

1.Dharmaram s/o Gheesaram

2.Sahdev s/o Dharmaram

3.Seema d/o Dharma all r/o village Kheduli, Tehsil Merta Distt. Nagaur.

4.Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Indian Oil Bhawan, Ashok Chowk, Near Radhaswami Satsang Bawan, Adarsh Nagar,Jaipur.

 

Date of Order 11.5.2017

 

Before:

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Nisha Gupta- President

 

Mr. Vizzy Agarwal counsel for the appellant

Mr.Shiv Vyas counsel for the respondent

 

 

2

 

BY THE STATE COMMISSION ( PER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NISHA GUPTA,PRESIDENT):

 

This appeal has been filed against the order passed by the District Forum, Nagaur dated 10.11.2016 whereby the claim has been allowed against the appellant as well as against respondent no.4 Indian Oil Corporation.

 

The contention of the appellant is that he never delivered gas cylinder to consumer at village Kheduli and when condition of bond has been violated he is not responsible.

 

Per contra the contention of the respondent is that gas cylinder was delivered by the appellant on his residence at Kheduli on 25.2.2016 and due to defective cylinder fire burst and the appellants were rightly held liable.

 

Heard the counsel for the parties and perused impugned judgment as well as original record of the case.

 

There is no dispute about the fact that as per Ex. A 1 connection voucher contains the address of the consumer as Jaishree Nagar, Merta and so also entered into the refill receipt

3

 

book. Record maintained by the appellant also speaks that address of the customer is Jaishree Nagar, Merta city. On the strength of above documents the contention of the appellant is that the delivery was never made at village Kheduli. This is not in dispute that on 25.2.2016 on the day of accident the gas cylinder was delivered to Dharmaram. The only question is whether it was delivered at Kheduli or Jaishree Nagar. The residence address written in the documents is also Jaishree Nagar but contention of the respondent consumer is that gas cylinder was delivered to him at village Kheduli and immediately after the incident he furnished the information Ex. 1 to the concerned police station and for necessary relief he also submitted application to the concerned authorities. Patwari of the village Kheduli also reached at spot and he prepared a inspection note which also speaks that due to defective Indane gas cylinder the accident happened. It is true that there is a mention of presence of employees of the appellant but their signatures have not been obtained but this inspection report cannot be doubted and Rojnamcha report Ex. 1 also clearly established that accident has taken place due to defective gas cylinder at village Kheduli. Hence, it can very well be concluded that on 25.2.2016 the gas cylinder was delivered to the customer Dharmaram.

4

 

The only dispute is about the location that at which place this gas cylinder was delivered. The clear contention of the consumer is that it was delivered to Kheduli and it also get strength due to the fact that it was get accidented at his residence at Kheduli. As per delivery report of the appellant Ex. A 3 the gas cylinder was delivered to the customer by delivery boy Jagdish Singh hence, the best evidence to prove the location of the delivery was Jagdish Singh but no affidavit of delivery boy has been submitted by the appellant and the appellant on the strength of connection documents is agitating that delivery was not made to village Kheduli as it was not the entered address of the consumer. Non-furnishing of the affidavit of Jagdish Singh is fatal and raise a presumption against the appellant.

 

It may also be noted that this is not been pleaded by the appellant positively that the delivery was made at Jaishree Nagar.

 

Further witnesses Bhanwaru Khan, Bharmal etc. have stated that Vishnu Gas Agency is used to deliver gas cylinder at village Kheduli and this fact has also been admitted by the appellant himself. Hence, it can very well be concluded

5

 

conveniently that the impugned gas cylinder was delivered to Dharmaram at village Kheduli and from the documents submitted by the respondent it is more than clear that due to defect in the gas cylinder fire burst and he suffered loss.

 

The Forum below has assessed the loss as Rs. 60,000/-. The appellant has submitted that there is no ground for the assessment but on the basis of Ex. 11 the Forum below has rightly assessed the loss as the Tehsildar, Land Revenue Inspector and Patwari has assessed the loss at Rs. 60,000/-. The statement attached to Ex. 11 clearly shows that kitchen was damaged and estimate loss has been assessed as Rs. 60,000/-. No rebuttal of the above assessment has been submitted by the appellant. Hence, in view of the facts of the present case the Forum below has rightly held that the appellant is deficient alongwith Indian Oil Corporation and liability has rightly been fastened on the appellant also.

 

Hence, in view of the above, there is no merit in this appeal and liable to be rejected.

(Nisha Gupta )

President

nm