Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/132/2015

Ram Kumar Singla - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indane Gas Corpn Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

15 Jan 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	132 of 2015
Date  of  Institution	:	13.3.2015
Date   of   Decision	:	15.1.2016

 

 

 

 

 

Ram Kumar Singla H. No. 1731, Phase 6, SAS Nagar, Mohali.

                …..Complainant

Versus

 

1. Indane Gas Corpn Pvt. Ltd. Tel. Bhavan, Plot No.6-A, First Floor, Sector 19B, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh through its Managing Director/Director.

 

2. M/s Mohali Gas Agency, Shop No.36, Ist floor, Bhagat Singh Market, Mohali through its Branch Manager.

 

 

3. ICICI Bank Ltd. SCF No.21-22, Phase 7, Mohali through its Branch Manager.

 

 

….. Opposite Parties

 

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU       MEMBER

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

 

 

For complainant(s)      :     Sh. Devinder Kumar, Advocate

 

For OP No.1             :     Ms. Geeta Gulati, Advocate.

For OP NO.2             :     Sh. Kulwinder Singh, Advocate

For OP No.3             :     Ms. Pallavi Sood, proxy for Sh. Sandeep                           Suri, Advocate.    

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          As per the case, the complainant paid Rs.1193.50 for one gas cylinder on 11.2.2014. Since the actual price of the cylinder was Rs.430/- and rest of amount was to be deposited in the account of the complainant as subsidy.  The complainant approached the gas agency Opposite Party No.2 and Indane gas corporation  Opposite Party No.1 regarding the issue time and again.  It is averred that the gas agency informed the complainant that it had already completed the formalities and since the account of the complainant is connected with the bank it is not responsible. Whereas the Indane gas  corporation intimated the complainant that since his aadhaar card is not connected with his bank account therefore, the money could not be deposited.  The complainant when enquired from the bank he was intimated that his aadhar card is already connected with bank account since 13.1.2014. When the grievance of the complainant was not redressed the complainant sent notice to the OPs but to no avail. Alleging the said act of OPs as deficiency in service, this compliant has been filed.

 

2.     Opposite Party No.1 has filed reply and stated that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the answering Opposite Party. As per clause 17 of the transaction entered into between the distributor i.e. Opposite Party No.2 and the corporation, the distributor shall act and shall always be deemed to have acted as principal and not as an agent on account of  corporation.  As such the answering Opposite Party is not liable for the negligent act of Opposite Party No.2.

         It is averred that transfer of subsidy amount into the bank account of the customer is done by the National Payment Council of India. The request for transfer of subsidy on domestic LPG refill equaling to Rs.727.70 was sent through Opposite Party No.2’s server but the same was rejected by Opposite Party No.3 bank with the remark “failed no such account (f)”. The advance of Rs.435/- was also set by Opposite Party No.2 on 8.2.2014 and 26.2.2014  but the same was also rejected by Opposite Party No.3 with the remark failed no such account (f). Further averred that the answering Opposite Party is only responsible for filling the LPG cylinder and delivering the same to the distributor.  The responsibility of the answering Opposite Party ends after delivery of  LPG cylinder to the distributor.  The answering Opposite Party has no role to play in non-disbursement of subsidy amount. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

 

3.     Opposite Party No.2 in its reply stated that the it is the dealer of Opposite Party No.1 providing LPG services to the complainant. It is averred that the complainant’s aadhaar number was linked with the system and the complainant’s subsidy amount was sent to the account which was linked for getting subsidy but the same was bounced back with the remarks “failed no such account(f)”.  The complainant was informed regarding the reason of non-receipt of subsidy amount and was advised to verify from bank regarding the correct linking of aadhaar number but the complainant instead of correcting the mistake filed the instant complaint. Denying all  other allegation contained in the complaint it has been prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

 

4.     Opposite Party No.3 in its reply stated that the answering Opposite Party has already issued a certificate to the effect that the Aadhaar card in question has already been updated in the account number 005805000592 from 13.1.2014 and the copy of the same has already been placed on record by the complainant.  The answering Opposite Party has no role to play in the dispute. The subsidy amount is required to be paid by Opposite Party No.1&2 into the account being maintained by the complainant with the Opposite Party bank unless any other bank account number had been given by the complainant. Rest of the allegation leveled in the complaint has been denied being wrong.  
5.     The Complainant also filed rejoinder thereby reiterating the averments as made in complaint and controverting that of the Opposite Parties made in the reply.
6.     Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
7.     We have heard the ld. Counsel for parties and have also perused the record.
8.     It is admitted case between the parties that the complainant paid Rs.1193.50Ps for re-filling of LPG Cylinder delivered on 11.12.2014 by Opposite Party No.2. It is also admitted that the actual cost of the LPG Cylinder was Rs.430/- and the complainant was entitled for subsidy amount of Rs.727.70PS which he never received in his account till today as well subsequent subsidies whenever became due as per booking and delivery of the cylinders.  With this core issue the complainant approached this Forum for the redressal of his grievance.
9.     Initially the complainant arrayed Opposite Party No.1&2 as party to the complaint and when notice of the same was served upon the parties they duly, appeared through their respective counsel. It is gathered that during the proceedings the counsel for Opposite Party No.2 moved an application before this Forum to direct the complainant to implead ICICI Bank where the complainant has linked his Aadhaar card for getting subsidy and the counsel for the complainant appended note on the said application that he has no objection if the ICICI bank is impleaded as necessary party.  Consequently the ICICI bank was impleaded as party to the complaint and was served to submit its version.
10.     Opposite Party No.1 in its reply submitted that they have no role to play for the transfer of the subsidy and are responsible only for the refilling of the LPG cylinders and delivering of the same to the distributor. Further submitted that subsidy amount is transferred by National Payments Council of India (NPCI) into beneficiary’s bank account, which is linked with Aadhaar card of the beneficiary customer as it is an automatic process. Further submitted that the request for transfer of subsidy on domestic LPG refilling for Rs.727.70Ps was sent through Opposite Party No.2 on different dates to the concerned bank but the same were rejected by the complainant’s bank i.e. Opposite Party No.3.  Further submitted as per clause 17 of the agreement entered into between the distributor and Opposite Party No.1 liability if any is of Opposite Party No.2 regarding settlement of such dispute.
11.     On the contrary Opposite Party No.2 tried to justify its stand stating that complainant’s subsidy amount was sent to his account, which was linked by it for getting subsidy but the same was bounced bank with the remarks ‘failed no such account’ and alleged that transfer of subsidy failed due to failure of the complainant to get his account linked with Aadhaar card number properly. Even he was advised to verify from his bank  regarding the correct link of Aadhaar card number instead he filed the present complaint.
12.     At the same time Opposite Party No.3 i.e. the complainant’s bank submitted that they duly linked the Aadhaar card No. 771120617685  in the bank account NO.005805000592 on 13^th January, 2014 and also issued certificate to this effect in favour of the complainant and claimed that there is no liability on their part.
13.     From the perusal of the record it is evident that Opposite Party No.3 has issued certificate to the effect that Aadhaar card No. 771120617685  has been updated in the bank account NO.005805000592  of the complainant but had not placed on record any cogent evidence to this effect. It also seems that Opposite Party No.2 while entering particulars of the complainant might have made mistake either by entering wrong Aadhaar number or bank account number of the complainant, which resulted in the bouncing back of the subsidy due to wrong linkage of account number or Aadhaar card No. 771120617685. Although as per agreement entered into between Opposite Party No.1 and 2, Opposite Party No.2 is solely responsible for settling such disputes even then they cannot escape their liability for the refund of the subsidy generated through their set up. Our observation is fortified by the National Payments Council of India’s instruction as placed on record with the rejoinder by the complainant in regard to the “type of query and action required”, states that all queries and verifications with respect of linkage of Aadhaar number to bank account and non receipt of subsidy should be taken up with customer’s respective bank/LPG dealer directly.  IT further states “ as a process, please note that the subsidies are initiated by respective LPG dealers and NPCI act as clearing house. Banks credit the customer account based on the credit instructions received from the oil marketing companies. No subsidy transactions are initiated from NPCI end.”
14.     In the present case the respective bank (Opposite Party No.3), Opposite Party No.2 as well as Opposite Party No.1 utterly failed to discharge their respective duties qua complainant regarding subsidy issue and also failed to justify their stand through cogent and convincing evidence. They just tried to justify their stand by shifting their responsibilities on one another. Hence there is no hesitation in holding that there is deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties as they failed to discharge their duties with utmost care and diligence and left the complainant to run from pillar to post to get his due and till date the matter is lingering on for no fault of the complainant, which caused him not only financial loss but also mental agony and physical harassment. As such the complaint deserves to be allowed against Opposite Parties.     
15.     In view of the above discussion, the complaint is allowed against the Opposite Parties and they are jointly and severally directed as under:-

        

a]  to make necessary corrections in their respective systems by reentering and re-filling the requisite details in order to ensure that pending as well as future subsidy dues of the complainant are properly accounted for in his account failing which it shall be the liability of the OPs jointly and severally to refund the subsidy amounts pending till date and become due in future till the problem is sorted out. The complainant shall also supply the requisite data/documents to the OPs as necessitated by them.

 

b]  To pay Rs.15,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant for their deficient service.

C]  To pay Rs.6,000/- towards litigation expenses.

 

         

         The above said order shall be complied with by the Opposite Parties within 30 days of its receipt, failing which they shall be liable to pay interest on the above awarded amount at (b) at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of this order till it is paid, besides paying litigation expenses. 

 

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

15.1.2016

                                                                                       Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

 (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER