View 1043 Cases Against Gas Agency
SHAHEED VIRENDER SINGH GAS AGENCY filed a consumer case on 15 Dec 2016 against JAI SINGH in the StateCommission Consumer Court. The case no is A/387/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 02 Feb 2017.
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA
First Appeal No : 387 of 2016
Date of Institution: 04.05.2016
Date of Decision : 15.12.2016
Shaheed Virender Singh Gas Agency (IOC) Mandi Ateli, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mahendergarh through its Manager Om Parkash Power of Attorney of Smt. Manbhavti Wife of late Shaheed Virender Singh.
Appellant-Opposite Party No.1
Versus
1. Jai Singh son of Sh. Ram Chander, resident of Village Salimpur, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mahendergarh (Haryana).
Respondent-Complainant
2. Senior Area Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Karnal, Area Office Kohand Assandh Road, Village Gudha, District Karnal, Haryana.
Respondent-Opposite Party No.2
CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.
Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.
Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member
Present: Shri Vaibhav Jain, Advocate for the appellant
Shri Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate for the respondent No.1
None for the respondent No.2
O R D E R
NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)
Shaheed Virender Singh Gas Agency-opposite party No.1 (appellant) is in appeal against the order dated March 29th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Narnaul (for short ‘District Forum’) whereby complaint filed by Jai Singh –complainant was allowed. For facilitation, operative part of the order is reproduced as under:-
“7. Therefore keeping in view the circumstances mentioned above, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence the complaint of complainant is hereby allowed with costs and the opposite parties are directed:-
2. On September 26th, 2013 appellant supplied gas cylinder to the complainant. Due to leakage, the cylinder caught fire. The complainant requested the appellant to replace the cylinder but to no avail.
3. The appellant in its written version pleaded that the gas cylinder supplied to the complainant was in good condition. On receipt of complaint, the mechanic of appellant visited the spot and found the gas cylinder in good condition.
4. The only plea raised by learned counsel for the appellant is that the amount awarded by the District Forum is on higher side.
5. It is not in dispute that the appellant supplied defective LPG cylinder to the complainant. The complainant did not lead any evidence to prove that he suffered any loss or damage from the defective LPG cylinder. The District Forum directed the opposite parties to pay Rs.10,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 10% per annum; to deliver one filled LPG cylinder and Rs.5500/- litigation expenses to the complainant, which in the considered opinion of this Commission is of course on higher side. In this view of the matter, the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.10,000/- and deliver one filled LPG cylinder to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. The appeal is disposed of accordingly and the impugned order is modified in the manner indicated above.
6. The statutory amount of Rs.7750/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the respondent-complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.
Announced 15.12.2016 | Diwan Singh Chauhan Member | B.M. Bedi Judicial Member | Nawab Singh President |
UK
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.