BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PRESENT
SHRI. P. SUDHIR : PRESIDENT
SMT. SATHI. R : MEMBER
SMT. LIJU B. NAIR : MEMBER
C.C.No: 496/2016 Filed on 17/10/2016
Dated: 27..10..2017
Complainant:
Sivasankaran Nair, Sindhu Sadanam, opp. Mannam Memorial School, Aruvippuram Road, Perumpazhuthoor-P.O., Neyyattinkara, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 126.
(Party in person)
Opposite parties:
1. Lakshmi Gas Agency, Kulkkottara Buildings, Palakkadavu Road, Neyyttinkara – 695 121.
(By Adv. Renjini. C.R)
2. District Collector, Civil Station, Kudappanakkunnu-P.O., Thiruvananthapuram.
This C.C having been heard on 24..08..2017, the Forum on 27..10..2017 delivered the following:
ORDER
SMT. LIJU B. NAIR, MEMBER:
Gist of the case is as follows: He is the consumer of the opposite party with consumer No.34755. As per the Government Order he is eligible to get free transportation of gas cylinder from the agency, since he is residing within 5km radius of the same. But he is not getting that exclusion and even he is charged extra for more than 10-15kms as per that order. Moreover the agency will not deliver refill gas cylinder to the customers directly, which according to him is only to extract more money from the consumers. So he prays for a direction from this Forum for the issuance of gas cylinders directly, and to issue bill with transportation charge separately and if the opposite party is not able to do so, then issue refill cylinders at bill rate only along with a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- and a direction to deliver the gas cylinder at bill date.
2. Opposite party entered appearance and filed version. Their contentions are as follows: This complaint was filed with a malafide intention to close the agency. Gas cylinders are issued to the customers within the period prescribed and as per the seniority of their booking. No such malpractice as alleged by the complainant is there in their agency and the complaint is a false one which is only to be dismissed in limine
Issues:
(i) Whether the allegation against the opposite party is proved?
(ii) If so, reliefs and costs for which the complainant is eligible?
3. Issues (i) & (ii): Complainant filed affidavit along with 2 documents which were marked as Exts. P1 & P2 series. No evidence is adduced by the opposite party. Perused the documents of the complainant and pleadings of both sides. Complainant alleges that he was charged extra for transportation. On perusing the Ext. P2 series bill, it is seen that extra amount is charged other than the rate of the cylinder. But we don’t know the distance between the agency and complainant’s house. Simply he states that he resides within 5km from agency. No evidence is there to prove the same. If he is outside 5km from the agency, he is bound to pay transportation charge. But to take a decision on this point, no evidence is before us. At the time of marking document Forum asked this question to this complainant. On that day he agreed to prove the same on the next posting. After that he was absent before this Forum. So we are of the opinion that the complainant failed to prove the same we are not in a position to grant any relief on this complaint, which is only to be dismissed.
In the result, complaint is dismissed.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 27th day of October, 2017.
Sd/-LIJU B. NAIR : MEMBER
Sd/-P. SUDHIR : PRESIDENT
Ad sd/-R. SATHI : MEMBER
C.C.No: 496/2016
APPENDIX
I. Complainant’s witness : N I L
II. Complainant’s documents:
P1 : Copy of the proceedings of the District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram dated 27/02/2015 No. C.S.6/1268/11.
P2series : Copies of Form No. 8B, The Kerala Value Added Tax Rules, 2005.
III. Opposite parties’ witness : N I L
IV. Opposite parties’ documents : N I L
Sd/-PRESIDENT
Ad.
