Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/691/2020

Manjusha Rani - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indian Oil Adani Gas Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Adv. Navneet Jindal

15 Dec 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint  No	:	691 of 2020
Date  of  Institution	:	21.12.2020
Date   of   Decision	:	15.12.2022

 

 

 

 

 

Manjusha Rani aged about 61 years w/o Sh.Ram Lal Jindal, Resident of House No.1195, Sector 42-B, Chandigarh.  

             …..Complainant

 

Versus

 

1]  Indian Oil Adani Gas Private Limited, through its Managing Dierctor/Director:-

    First Address:- Plot No.55, Aspire Tower, 5^th Floor, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh 160002

    Second Address:- Howe India House, 2^nd Floor, 81, Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019

 

2]  Managing Director/Director, Indian Oil Adani Gas Private Limited, Plot No.55, Aspire Tower, 5^th Floor, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh 160002

….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA    PRESIDING MEMBER 

                    SH.S.K.SARDANA       MEMBER

                               

Argued by  :    Sh.Navneet Jindal, Advocate for complainant.

  Sh.M.S.Rana, Advocate for OPs

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, PRESIDING MEMBER

 

         Concisely put, the complainant was having two PNG Gas Connections provided by OPs vide Customer ID No.2000026352 for Ground Floor & Customer ID No.2000026353 for first floor.  It is stated that for the period of 1.9.2020 to 31.10.2020 there was no consumption of gas but the OPs still sent the bill of Rs.236/- including meter rental & taxes.  It is stated that at the time of installing the PNG Gas connection as well as in the agreement signed at the time of taking connections and depositing security amount, there was no mentioned of any minimum charges to be charged by OPs.  The complainant raised this issue with OPs but they did not pay any heed, as such, the complainant got the said connections disconnected for which the OPs also charged Rs.1180/- including taxes.  It is also stated that the OPs cannot charge for Zero consumption and that there is no clause of minimum charges in case of non-usage of consumption of gas.  Alleging the said act & conduct of the OPs as unfair trade practice and deficiency in service, this complaint has been preferred. 

 

2]       The OPs have filed joint reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that if the consumption is below of minimum threshold, then the minimum charges are applied as per the tariff card of the OPs available in public domain.  It is also stated that tariff card also mentions the charges of the Permanent Disconnection of the meter (Ann.OP-1/1).  It is submitted that in the terms & conditions signed by complainant, it is mentioned that charges shall be payable by buyer to seller per prevailing tariff card.  It is also submitted that minimum charges are levied even by the Chandigarh Electricity Department and Indraprastha Gas Limited (Anns.OP-1/3 & OP-1/4) Denying all other allegations and pleading no deficiency in service, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

3]       Rejoinder has also been filed by complainant controvering the assertions of the OPs made in their reply.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have perused the entire record.

 

6]       It is undisputed that the complainant got two PNG Gas Connections provided by OPs vide Customer ID No.2000026352  for Ground Floor & Customer ID No.2000026353 for first floor and that for period of 1.9.2020 to 31.10.2020 there was no consumption of gas but still the OPs sent her bill of Rs.236/- including meter rental & taxes. To this the stand of the OPs is that the minimum charges are applied as per the tariff card of the OPs if the consumption is below of minimum threshold, which is available in public domain.

 

7]       Ann.OP-1/1 so relied upon by the OPs alleging it as Tariff Card containing clause that monthly minimum charges can be charged even if the supply is not in use, alleged to be based on the agreement executed between the parties, is not to be relied upon as nowhere Ann.OP-1/1, the so called Tariff Card reveals that the same belongs to the OPs in question. Even Ann.OP-1/2 i.e. agreement entered into between the complainant and OPs does not contain any of the provision/term making liable the consumer to pay any maintenance charges in case of low usage.  

 

8]       The OPs failed to place on record any such terms & conditions duly brought to the notice of the complainant/consumer well before installing/issuing the Gas Connections in question.  Thus, the OPs are not justified in demanding or charging  any amount against any head, which has never been brought to the notice of consumer/complainant well before providing such facility/service.  Therefore, there is not only gross deficiency in service on the part of OPs but the OPs also indulged into unfair trade practice.

 

9]       We can well assume the mental agony and harassment suffered by the complainant due to deficient and unfair act of the OPs, as a result the complainant has to surrender her connections.  Though the mental harassment could not be compensated in terms of money but certainly a reasonable amount of compensation is required to be paid and also this practice needs to be curbed, where the consumer is taken by surprise by raising demand of minimum charges which were never clarified at the time of availing service. This practice itself is unfair trade practice resorted to by the OPs No.1 & 2.

 

10]      Taking into consideration the above discussion and findings, we are of the opinion deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice resorted to by the OPs No.1 & 2 have been proved.  Therefore, the present complaint is allowed against OPs No.1 & 2 with directions to pay a lumpsm amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for the causing harassment & agony as well as litigation expenses and it also includes the refund of minimum charges so charged by OPs. The OPs No.1 & 2 are also directed to deposit an amount of Rs.One Lakh in the “Consumer Legal Aid Account” No.32892854721, maintained with the State Bank of India,   Sector 7-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh in the name of Secretary, Hon’ble State Commission UT Chandigarh.

         Since the complaint has been filed under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as such we direct the opposite parties, per Section 39(g) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to discontinue the unfair trade practice of charging their consumer(s) without any consumption under the garb of minimum charges without getting the consent and knowledge of the customer/consumer and further not to repeat this unfair trade practice to gain unnecessary monetary benefits.

          This order shall be complied with by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall also be liable to pay additional cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant apart from the above relief.

         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. A copy of this order be also sent to the Secretary (SCDRC), U.T. Chandigarh, for necessary action.

Announced

15^th December, 2022                                                                           Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

Sd/-

 (S.K.SARDANA)

MEMBER