BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.
Consumer Complaint No.62 of 2016
Date of Institution: 10.2.2016
Date of Decision: 22.6.2016
Mr.Jaswant Singh S/o Sh.Ujagar Singh R/o H.No. 67, Village Mullechak,Near Gate Bhagtanwala,Amritsar
Complainant
Versus
- HP Gas Services Ltd., Village Dhaba , P.O. Mandiala, Jalandhar Road, Hoshiarpur through its Principal Officer.
- Amrohi Gas Agency, 45, Deep Complex , Opp. HDFC Bank, Court Road, Amritsar through its Prop./Partner/Principal Officer
Opposite Parties
Complaint under section 12 & 13 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Present: For the Complainant : Sh.Deepinder Singh,Advocate
For the Opposite Parties 1&2: Sh. Rahul Sabharwal,Advocate
Coram
Sh.S.S.Panesar, President
Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member
Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member
Order dictated by:
Sh.S.S. Panesar, President.
1. Jaswant Singh complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 12 &13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that complainant is a consumer of Gas connection No. 600470 as assigned by the opposite parties, the complainant is a consumer as provided under the Act and is competent to invoke the jurisdiction of the Forum. The complainant is getting the delivery of the gas supply at his residence by the opposite parties since the connection was issued to him for his domestic purpose, now all of the sudden the opposite parties had stopped supplying the gas supply to the complainant without assigning any reason. The complainant got booked the gas refill for the month of October, November and December 2015 vide booking Nos. 512437, 513883 and 514101 respectively. But instead of supplying the gas refill, opposite parties cancelled the said booking requests without assigning any reasons and without intimating the complainant. The complainant made futile visits to the office of opposite party No.2 regularly but the opposite party refused to supply the gas refill to the complainant. The behavior and attitude towards the complainant was very hostile. The complainant has sought for following reliefs vide instant complaint :-
a) Opposite parties be directed to resume the supply of gas refill to the complainant.
b) Opposite parties be directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- to the complainant .
c) Opposite parties be also directed to pay adequate cost of the present litigation.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and contested the complaint by filing joint written reply taking certain preliminary objections therein inter-alia that complaint as framed is not maintainable; that present complaint has been filed with the ulterior motive to harass the opposite parties No.1 & 2 ; that complainant has not approached the court with clean hands and has concealed the material facts from the knowledge of this Forum ; that present complaint is not maintainable as complainant has not exhausted any of the remedy available to him before approaching this court. The complainant had filed the present complaint by misleading this Forum in order to harass the opposite parties ; that even otherwise the instant complaint against the answering opposite parties is not maintainable. In reality the opposite party No.2 was reissued the agency in November 2014 and the complainant in reality earlier was the customer of A.S.Gas Service, Gumtala and the complainant alongwith other customers was transferred in bulk to the opposite party No.2 in 2015. From the beginning when complainant booked the gas cylinder his address was not traceable by the delivery persons of the opposite party No.2, whenever the delivery men used to go to give the supply, the address was not available and the delivery had to be cancelled accordingly ; that complainant used to get the gas cylinder from the godown of the opposite party as and when required by him as per his convenience and the complainant never bothered to make any complaint or give any correction or clarification of the address of the opposite party. On merits, facts narrated in the complaint have been specifically denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost was made.
3. In his bid to prove Sh.Deepinder Singh,Adv. counsel for the complainant tendered his affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of delivery bill Ex.C-2, copy of booking messages Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-5, copy of SMS messages Ex.C-6 to Ex.C-11 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
4. To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh.Harpreet Singh,Adv.counsel for opposite parties No.1 & 2 tendered affidavit of Sh.Pawan Kumar C/o Amrohi Gas Agency Ex.OP1,2/1 , copy of refill order details of the complainant customer number Ex.OP1,2/2 and closed the evidence on behalf of opposite parties No.1 & 2.
5. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
6. From the appreciation of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that the complainant is the consumer of opposite party No.2 while opposite party No.1 is the principal office of opposite party No.2. As such complainant is the consumer of the opposite parties. It is also an admitted fact that the gas connection of the complainant was shifted from A.S. Gas Service Gumtala alongwith other customers in bulk to opposite party No.2 in the year 2015. It is also not disputed that the complainant applied for supply of gas refill for the month of October, November and December 2015 vide booking Nos. 512437, 513883 and 514101 respectively, copies whereof are Ex.C-5, Ex.C-4 and Ex.C-3 . Acknowledgement messages were also sent to the complainant at the end of opposite party No.2 , copies whereof are Ex.C-6, Ex.C-7 and Ex.C-8 on record. But however, the opposite parties admittedly did not supply the gas refill to the complainant on all those occasions . Reason given has been that the address of the complainant was not traceable. It is none of the case of the opposite parties that the complainant was not resident of H.No.67, Village Mullechak,Near Gate Bhagtanwal, Amritsar. If there was any dispute regarding correct address of the complainant with opposite party No.2 , opposite party No.2 was provided with the mobile number of the complainant and they could contact him for ascertaining the exact location of his house. But nothing was done in the matter . The other plea taken by the opposite parties , has been that the complainant used to collect the refill from their godown as per his convenience, which is also deficiency in service. Because the company cannot ask the consumer to get the gas refill directly from the godown . Rather it is the duty of the opposite parties to supply the gas refill at the door step of the consumer. All this shows that the opposite parties are deficient in service. Consequently the opposite parties are directed to restore the gas supply to the complainant with immediate effect. For deficiency in service, opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs. 10000/- as compensation to the complainant while cost of litigation are assessed at Rs. 2000/-. The complaint stands allowed accordingly. If the order is not complied within a period of 30 days of the supply of copy of this order, awarded amount shall carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of passing of the order until full and final recovery. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 22.6.2016
/R/ ( S.S.Panesar )
President
( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)
Member Member
