Kerala

Wayanad

CC/134/2012

Robert. M.J, Mekkal House, Milk society road, Mananthavady. - Complainant(s)

Versus

K.A. Mathew, Proprietor, St Jude Indane Gas agency, Thonichal. - Opp.Party(s)

02 Dec 2014

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
CIVIL STATION ,KALPETTA
WAYANAD-673122
PHONE 04936-202755
 
Complaint Case No. CC/134/2012
 
1. Robert. M.J, Mekkal House, Milk society road, Mananthavady.
Post,
Wayanad.
Kerala.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. K.A. Mathew, Proprietor, St Jude Indane Gas agency, Thonichal.
Nalloornadu.
Wayanad.
Kerala.
2. The chief Area Manager, India Oil corporation ltd, (indane) Marketing Division office, 2nd Floor, PMK towers
Civil station,
Wayanad.
Kerala.
3. The Taluk Supply Officer
Mananthavady.
wayand.
Kerala.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Renimol Mathew MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:

The complaint is filed Under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act of 1986 for an Order directing the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs.8,020/- for the loss sustained to the complainant due to the deficiency of service from the part of the opposite parties in supplying gas cylinders in right time and right place to the complainant.

 

2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant is a consumer vide consumer No.20842 with Manoj Gas Agency at Mananthavady. The Agency was functioning at Mananthavady till June 2010. Thereafter, the opposite party No.2 made arrangements to supply gas to the consumers through opposite party No.1 and the agency office is changed to Dwaraka which is 7 kilometers away from Mananthavady. But opposite party No.1 did not supply gas to the consumers in right time and committed deficiency of service. Again the office from Dwaraka is shifted to Thonichal. The change of office from Mananthavady to Thonichal caused much hardships to the consumers. The complainant got delivery of gas for an over rate of Rs.425/- for the booking dates 21.07.2011, 03.09.2011, 15.10.2011, 02.12.2011, 23.01.2012 and delivery dates 20.08.2011, 01.10.2011, 19.11.2011, 07.01.2012, 31.03.2012 respectively. The above stated delivery are done by opposite parties with inordinate delay which caused much hardships to the complainant and the complainant is forced to avail private gas due to the above said delay from the side of opposite parties. The case of the complainant is that the opposite parties did not make door delivery to him in right time. Aggrieved by this, the complaint has been filed.

 

3. On filing the complaint, Notices were issued to opposite parties and opposite parties No.1 and 3 appeared before the Forum and filed version. Notice to opposite party No.2 is served to opposite party No.2 but opposite party No.2 did not appear and filed version. Hence opposite party No.2 is set ex-parte on 15.06.2012. In the version of opposite party No.1, opposite party No.1 denied the material allegations in the complaint and contended that the gas is supplied in time to those who have booked for gas. No over rate is levied from customers. The opposite party No1 states that, opposite party No.1 is giving receipts for the refill price at the time of delivery to all consumers. The opposite party No.1 was ready to supply gas to the complainant in right time but there was no person to accept the delivery cylinder from the opposite party, for which the opposite parties are not liable. No loss is sustained to the complainant due the act of opposite parties. The opposite party No.1 contented that the complaint is filed by complainant due to the instigation of one K. P. Sebastian, who is a complainant in CC.174/2011. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

 

4. On perusal of complaint, version and documents the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties?

2. Relief and Cost.

 

5. Point No.1:- The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents. The complainant is examined as PW1 and Ext. A1 is marked. The opposite party No.3 is examined as OPW1 and Ext. B1 is marked. On going through the evidence and documents, the Forum found that there is inordinate delay in supplying gas cylinder to the complainant by the opposite party. The reason for the delay is not proved by opposite party by producing cogent and convincing evidences before the Forum. The Taluk Supply Officer is examined from the side of opposite party as OPW1 and the OPW1 stated before the Forum that if there is delay in supplying gas cylinder to the consumers after booking, it will be deficiency of service from the part of Agency. More over, OPW1 stated that the Agency cannot levy more amount from consumers than the actual price. The complainant's house is situated near motorable road according to the complainant. The opposite party No.1 contented that the house is not situated near motorable road and there will be no person to accept the cylinder when it is taken for delivery. It is up to the opposite party No.1 to disprove the contention of complainant. But opposite party No.1 failed to disprove it. Admittedly, there is delay in supplying gas cylinders to the complainant. On perusing Ext.A1 document, it is clear that as per booking dated 21.07.2011 the cylinder supplied on 20.08.2011, for 03.09.2011 booking, cylinder supplied on 01.10.2011. For 15.10.2011 the supply is on 19.11.2011, for 02.12.2011 booking supply is on 07.01.2012. On 23.01.2012 booking, the supply is on 31.03.2012. So there is inordinate delay in supplying the cylinder. So the Forum found that the delay from the side of opposite party No.1 in supplying gas cylinders to the complainant amounts to deficiency of service from the part of opposite party No.1.

6. Point No.2:- Since the Forum found deficiency of service from the part of opposite party No.1, the opposite party No.1 is liable to pay the cost and compensation to the complainant. The Point No.2 is decided accordingly.

 

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and opposite party No.1 is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as compensation to the complainant along with Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only)as cost of the proceedings. The opposite party No.1 shall comply the Order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order, failing which the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest for the whole sum.

 

 

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 2nd day of December 2014.

Date of Filing:24.04.2012.

 

PRESIDENT :Sd/-

MEMBER :Sd/-

MEMBER :Sd/-

/True Copy/

 

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

 

APPENDIX.

 

Witness for the complainant:

 

PW1. Robert. M. J. Complainant.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:

OPW1. C. Rajeev. Taluk Supply Officer, Mananthavady.

 

Exhibits for the complainant:

A1. Copy of Consumer Card of Gas connection.

Exhibits for the opposite Parties.

B1(a). Copy of Statement of complainant's wife. Dt:19.05.2012.

B1(b). Copy of Statement of Opposite party No.1. Dt:22.05.2012.

 

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Renimol Mathew]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.