Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/110/2019

Neha Goel - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Rikash Goel Adv.

13 Jun 2019

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

 

 

Appeal No.	:	110 of 2019
Date of Institution	:	04.06.2019
Date of Decision	:	13.06.2019

Neha Goel wife of Sh. Rikash Goel, Plot No.35, Industrial Area, Plot No.35, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh.

…..Appellant/Complainant.

Versus

 

1.  India Oil Corporation Ltd., Plot No.3A, Madhya Marg, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh (Near ESI Office & Jangarna Bhawan), through its Director/Secretary/Principal Officer.

2^nd Address:

Second Floor, World Trade Center, Babar Road, New Delhi – 110001.

3^rd Address:

G-9, Indian Oil Bhawan, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400051 (Near Kala Nagar Signal Bandra Station Next to Vasundara Bhawan Building).

2.  Director/Secretary/Principal Officer of  India Oil Corporation Ltd., Plot No.3A, Madhya Marg, Sector 19-A, Chandigarh (Near ESI Office & Jangarna Bhawan).

2^nd Address:

Second Floor, World Trade Center, Babar Road, New Delhi – 110001.

3^rd Address:

G-9, Indian Oil Bhawan, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400051 (Near Kala Nagar Signal Bandra Station Next to Vasundara Bhawan Building).

3.  M/s Ram Chandra & Sons (Indane), through its Proprietor/Partner/Director, Booth No.2, Sector 30-C, Chandigarh.

2^nd Address:

Plot No.147-148, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh.

4.  Proprietor/Partner/Director of M/s Ram Chandra & Sons (Indane), through its, Booth No.2, Sector 30-C, Chandigarh.

2^nd Address:

Plot No.147-148, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh.

 

….Respondents/Opposite Parties.

 

Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  against  order  dated  13.05.2019 passed by District   Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T. Chandigarh  in Consumer Complaint No.337 of 2019.

 

BEFORE: MRS. PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER.

                MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER.

 

Argued by:

 

Sh. Rikash Goel, Advocate for the appellant/complainant.

 

PER  RAJESH  K.  ARYA, MEMBER

                This appeal has been filed by the complainant against order dated 13.05.2019 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh (in short ‘the Forum’) vide which, her complaint bearing No.337 of 2019 was dismissed by the said Forum.

2.             The grouse of the appellant/complainant was that as per policy of the Government, subsidy to the tune of Rs.149/-, on account of booking a gas cylinder by paying an amount of Rs.717/-, was not credited in her saving bank account, to which she was entitled to. According to her, the said act of the respondents/opposite parties amounted to deficiency in service & unfair trade practice on their part.

3.             We have carefully gone through the impugned order and record of the case and are of the considered opinion that the complaint of the appellant/complainant was rightly dismissed vide the order impugned. It is admitted case of the appellant/complainant in her complaint that earlier subsidy was being credited to her account. During the course of arguments, Counsel for the appellant/complainant confirmed that after this one occasion, subsidiary is being credited in complainant’s account regularly. It may be stated here that in case, if at one point of time, she was not given the benefit of subsidy against the booking dated 31.03.2019 & delivery of gas cylinder on 02.04.2019, it cannot be said to be deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the respondents/opposite parties. It was for the appellant/complainant to take up the matter with Govt. of India, which was not impleaded as party in the complaint, or with the respondents/opposite parties, which she never did. There is nothing on record of the Forum to demonstrate that at any point of time, the issue qua non-crediting of subsidy was agitated by the appellant/complainant before the respondents/opposite parties. Moreover, as rightly held by the Forum, subsidy cannot be claimed as a matter of right, which is granted by the Government to the users so as to keep the price of the gas under check. The respondents/opposite parties cannot be held to be guilty for non action on the part of the appellant/complainant in taking up the matter with the Govt. of India. We are one with the view expressed by the Forum that the Distributor was to charge the market value of the gas cylinder and subsidy was to be released by the Government, for which, the respondents/opposite parties cannot be held deficient.

4.             Hence, we are of the opinion that the order passed by the Forum, being based on the correct appreciation of evidence and law, on the point, does not suffer from any illegality or perversity.

5.             No other point was raised by the Counsel for the appellant/complainant.

6.             For the reasons recorded above, this appeal being devoid of any merit, is dismissed in limine, with no order as to costs. The impugned order dated 13.05.2019 passed by District Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh is upheld.

7.             Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.

8.             The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

Pronounced.

13.06.2019.

PADMA PANDEY)

        PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

 

(RAJESH  K. ARYA)

MEMBER

Ad