D.O.F. 22.10.2013

                                            D.O.O. 20.01.2014

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KANNUR

Present:      Sri. K.Gopalan                   :                President

                   Smt. Sona Jayaraman K.  :               Member

                   Sri. Babu Sebastian         :               Member

Dated this the 20^th day of January, 2014.

C.C.No.306/2013

A.P. Raveendran

Sandram

Kandarkkaiparamb

Kandakkai P.O.                                                    :         Complainant

Mayyil

Kannur – 670 602

(Rep. by Adv. Deepa Chandran)

1.The Managing Director

   Kerala State Co-operative Consumer

   Federation Limited

   Gandhi Nagar

   Ernakulam – 682 020                                        :         Opposite Parties

2. The Secretary

    Mayyil Service Co-operative Bank

   P.O. Mayyil

   Kannur – 670 602

O R D E R

Sri. Babu Sebastian, Member

          This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection

 Act for an order directing the opposite parties to refund `5750 together with `15000 as compensation to the complainant.

          As per the averments in the complaint, the complainant has taken gas connection from opposite party No.2, Secretary, Mayyil Service Co-operative Bank and other opposite party is the Managing Director, Kerala State Co-operative Consumer Federation Ltd.  The gas distribution is a joint effort of both opposite parties.  The complainant paid `5750 to the 2^nd opposite party at the time of taking gas connection with an undertaking that this security amount will be refunded, when the complainant is surrendering the gas connection.  This condition is advertised by the 1^st opposite party.  After some time the gas distribution become irregular and gas was not available in time.  Because of interruption in supply of gas and price rise, the complainant surrendered the equipment before the 2^nd opposite party and they issued receipt for that.  But when asked for refund of money, opposite party told the complainant that the amount was entrusted to the 1^st opposite party and so opposite parties did not refund the amount.  Hence this complaint.

          After receiving the complaint, Forum sent notice to both parties.  The opposite party No.1, Kerala State Consumerfed filed version contenting that complaint is not maintainable since it is hit by under section 69 of Co-operative Societies Act.  The difficulties and hurdles faced by the Consumerfed has been elaborately discussed in version.  It is admitted that at the time of giving gas connection complainant has paid `5750.  But the claim for refund is not allowable.  On the above pleading the following issues were framed. 

1.  Whether there is any deficiency on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the consumer is entitled for the remedy as prayed in the complaint?
3. Relief and cost.

Evidence consists of oral evidence adduced by the complainant as PW1 and documentary evidence Ext.A1 marked on the side of the complainant.

Issues No.1 to 3:

          It is admitted that the complainant has paid `5750 at the time when the LPG connection was taken.  It is seen at first instance gas was regularly supplied.  But the supply of gas subsequently become irregular.  It is true that the opposite parties failed to supply gas uninterruptedly.  When gas is not available there is no use of keeping the equipments.  Under such circumstance, the complainant happened to surrender the connection and he can not be blamed.

          The opposite parties have not appeared before the Forum except the version filed by the 1^st opposite party.  The contention raised in the version cannot be considered as evidence of the opposite party.

          The complainant asked the opposite parties to refund the amount that had paid at the time of availing the gas connection, but opposite party did not make payment.  It is the duty of the opposite party to refund the amount at the time of surrendering the equipments.  Ext.A1 shows that the complainant has surrendered the cylinder and regulator to opposite party and opposite party acknowledged the receipt of `5750 from the complainant.  Thus there is clear deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. The complainant is entitled to get the amount of `5750 refunded.  So issues No.1 to 3 are answered partly in favour of the complainant.

          In the result, the complaint is partly allowed, directing the opposite parties to refund an amount of `5750 (Rupees Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty only) to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to execute the order on the expiry of 30 days as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.

          Dated this the 20^th day of January, 2014.

                           Sd/-                    Sd/-                Sd/-

                       President               Member          Member   

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the Complainant

A1.  Certificate dated 18.10.2013.

Exhibits for the opposite party

Nil

Witness examined for the complainant

Nil

Witness examined for opposite party

Nil

      /forwarded by order/

                                                                     SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT