RESERVED

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P., Lucknow.

Appeal No. 2133 of 2014

Archana Gas Agency, Baghnath Chauraha,

Hata, Zila, Kushinagar through Proprietor.           ..Appellant.

Versus

Harishankar Sahni s/o Laxmi Prasad,

R/o Khanu Chapra Bagha, Thana, Nebua

Naurangiya, Tehsil, Padrauna Zila, Kushanagar..Respondent.

Present:-                                                   

1- Hon’ble Sri Vijai Varma, Presiding Member.

2- Hon’ble Sri Govardhan Yadav, Member.

None for the appellant.

Shri S.K. Shukla for the respondent.

Date 10.9.2018 

JUDGMENT

(Delivered by Sri Vijai Varma,  Member)

This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 19.9.2014, passed by the District Forum, Kushinagar in complaint case No.155 of 2013. 

The facts leading to this appeal, in short, are that the respondent/complainant was given gas connection no.5906548 from Ashoka Gas Agency, Gorakhpur on 30.11.2002 which was a double cylinders connection. He was getting gas cylinders from Ashoka Gas Agency till 25.8.2004 and when he went to Ashoka Gas Agency on 26.8.2004 then he was told that his gas connection has been transferred to his area of Hata to Archana Gas Agency. When on 27.8.2004, he went to Archana Gas Agency for finding out about the transfer of his gas connection then he was asked to contact Captanganj Gas Agency of his area as it might have been transferred to that Gas Agency but when he inquired from

(2)

Captanganj Gas Agency then he was told that no such gas connection has been received on transfer. The complainant, thereafter, went to Ashoka Gas Agency where he was told that the gas connection has already been transferred to Archana Gas Agency, but again the Manager of Archana Gas Agency stated that no such transfer of the gas connection was received at their Agency.  The complainant kept running from pillar to post for years together but nothing was done, so he thought of taking another connection, then he was told that if there is a gas connection in his name then another gas connection cannot be given. So he again went to Ashoka Gas Agency where they gave in writing on 16.1.2013 that the connection was already transferred to Archana Gas Agency whereupon he again went to Archana Gas Agency then he was told that the connection was already there but as it pertains to the area of Captanganj, hence he was giving a transfer voucher for Indane Gas Agency, Captanganj but while giving the SV paper, instead of connection for double cylinders a single cylinder connection was given as per SV paper no.21717700000132 dated 10.2.2013, so the gas connection, the transfer of which should have been done within a week, was done in a month and for hiding their mistake they showed single cylinder connection instead of a double cylinders connection. The complainant, thereafter, filed a complaint case before the Forum below wherein the OP appeared but did not file any reply hence, the matter proceeded exparte and the ld. Forum passed the exparte order on 19.9.2014, as under:-

"परिवादी एकपक्षीय रूप से स्‍वीकार किया जाता है। विपक्षी को आदेशित किया जाता है कि वह परिवादी को क्षतिपूर्ति के रूप में रू062700.00 तथा अर्थदण्‍ड 

(3)

2000.00 रू0 कुल 64700.00 परिवाद दखिल होने की तिथ 24.7.2013 से वास्‍तविक अदायगी तिथि तक 06 प्रतिशत साधारण वार्षिक ब्‍याज सहित एक माह में अदा कर देवें।  विपक्षी को यह आदेश भी दिया जाता है कि परिवादी के कनेक्‍शन पेपर की पूर्ववत डबल सिलिण्‍डर करके परिवादी के वर्तमान गैस एजेंसी को उक्‍त अवधि में उपलब्‍ध करावें।"

Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order that the appellant/OP has filed this appeal mainly on the grounds that the original SV paper dated 17.1.2013 was received from Ashoka Gas Agency whereupon after inquiry a DBC on 10.2.2013 was sent to the concerned Gas Agency of the area of Captanganj. Hence, the appellant/OP had not committed any deficiency in service but the ld. Forum has passed the impugned order illegally against the facts and evidence, therefore, it is liable to be set aside and the appeal allowed.

The respondent has filed objection against the appeal that the appellant had been in fact utilizing both the cylinders for 9 years and it is only after Ashoka Gas Agency gave in writing that the gas connection has been transferred on 26.8.2004 that the appellant took action. Therefore, the ld. Forum has passed a correct order.

None appeared for the appellant. Heard counsel for the respondent Shri S.K. Shukla and perused the entire records. Written argument was filed from the side of the appellant.  

In this case, it is not disputed that the complainant was having a double cylinder gas connection of Indane since 30.11.2002. The disputed point according to the respondent/ complainant is that this connection was transferred from Ashoka Gas Agency to the appellant/OP Gas Agency on 26.8.2004 but the appellant/OP did not provide him the gas connection and it is only in 2013 that the gas connection

(4)

could be transferred and that too for a single cylinder, therefore, the appellant/OP committed deficiency in service whereas according to the appellant/OP, the SV of gas connection was received only on 2013 and within a few days, it was transferred to the Gas Agency at Captanganj of the complainant’s area, therefore, they did not commit any deficiency in service.

So, now it is to be seen as to whether the appellant/OP committed deficiency in service in not transferring the gas connection of the complainant for a long period and that too with SV of only one cylinder instead of two or not. If so, its effect.  

In this regard, it is an admitted fact that gas connection of the complainant was for two cylinders. This gas connection was with Ashoka Gas Agency. In the year 2004, this gas connection was allegedly transferred to Archana Gas Agency, the area pertaining to the complainant. In support of his contention, the complainant has filed a copy of the letter written on 16.1.2013 by Ashoka Gas Agency addressed to the appellant/OP Archana Gas Agency mentioning therein that the SV no.5906548 was transferred from their Agency to Archana Gas Agency on 26.8.2004. From this letter, it is clear that Ashoka Gas Agency has sent SV to the appellant/OP Agency on 26.8.2004 and this supports the version of the complainant that he was made to run from pillar to post for years together as the appellant/OP did not give him the gas connection which was transferred to their Agency by Ashoka Gas Agency. In this regard, it is argued by the ld. Counsel for the appellant that SV was sent to the appellant/OP only in

(5)

2013 but the appellant failed to prove the point that SV was not received by them till 2013 and the best evidence in this regard could have been the SV voucher which was received by them  from Ashoka Gas Agency but that does not appear to have been done by them. They have merely produced the copy of SV voucher issued by them on 19.2.2013 and that too for a single cylinder whereas the original connection was for double cylinders. So, there is no justification whatsoever for not making a transfer voucher for double cylinders when the original connection was for double cylinders only.

          So from the evidence on record, it is clear that the appellant not only did not take any action for transferring the gas connection of the complainant to Captanganj Gas Agency for years together but also when they finally made the transfer voucher for Captanganj Gas Agency then with malafile intention transferred the connection for single cylinder only. Therefore, there was obvious deficiency in service on the part of the appellant/ OP and therefore, the ld. Forum has rightly concluded the deficiency in service on the part of the appellant/OP but awarding of compensation to the tune of Rs.64,700.000 was much higher which considering all the circumstances of the case, we consider a sum of Rs.30,000.00 only as compensation in place of Rs.64,700.00 would be appropriate. The impugned order accordingly deserves to be amended to that extent only and the appeal partly allowed.    

ORDER

The appeal is partly allowed. The impugned  judgment and order dated 19.9.2014 is amended to the extent that the amount of compensation is reduced to Rs.30,000.00 in place of Rs.64,700.00. The rest of the order shall  remain as it is.

(6)

Certified copy of the judgment be provided to the parties in accordance with rules.

                 (Vijai Varma)                 (Govardhan Yadav)

               Presiding Member                     Member

Jafri PA II

Court No.3