V.C.Abdulsalam,S/o K.T.Hassai,Business,Summaya Manzil,Chakkarakkal,PO.Mowancherry.Kannur Dt. filed a consumer case on 15 Sep 2008 against MD.Anjarakandy Farmers SC Bank , Kavinmoola,Mamba PO.KannurDt. in the Kannur Consumer Court. The case no is CC/36/2007 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Nov -0001.
MD.Anjarakandy Farmers SC Bank , Kavinmoola,Mamba PO.KannurDt. 2.Managing Director,Kerala State co-op Consumer Federation , Gandhi nagar,Cochin , Ernakulam 3.Manager,koldy Prtroleum India Ltd Moongilamada,Vannammada,Kozhijampara Palakkad
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
1. GOPALAN.K 2. JESSY.M.D 3. PREETHAKUMARI.K.P
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
15.9.08 K.P.Preethakumari, Member This is a complaint filed under section12 of the consumer protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to refund the deposited amount of Rs.5750/- with interest and cost. The complainants case is that he had availed gas connection by giving an amount of Rs.500/- as registration charge and Rs.5250/- as deposit from 1st opposite party,2nd and 3rd opposite parties were supplying gas as a joint venture. At the time of availing gas connection there was a stipulation that the deposited amount of Rs.5750/- will be returned back at the time of surrendering gas connection. Later on the supply of gas became irregular and that of supplied were substandard in quality and quantity. So the complainant had surrendered the connection on 20.11.06 and demanded for refund as stipulated. But they were not ready to do so. Hence this complaint. On receiving the notice from the Forum, the opposite parties 1 and 2 appeared and filed their version. 1st opposite party filed version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection from them by paying an amount of Rs.5750/-. But contended that they had handed over the amount to 2nd opposite party and acted as only an agent of 2nd opposite party and hence they have no liability. 2nd opposite party filed version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection by giving an amount of Rs.5750/- to1st opposite party and handed over the amount to 2nd opposite party. But contended that out of which they had handed over Rs.5500/- to 3rd opposite party, Rs.100/- to 1st opposite party and Rs.150/- had appropriated it self. More over the delay caused in supplying the refilled cylinder was not because of any fault committed by them but due to the withdrawal of 3rd opposite party from supplying gas. So if any deficiency is found only 3rd opposite party is liable for the same. On the above pleadings the following issues are raised for consideration. 1..Whether there is any deficiency on the part of opposite parties? 2.Whether the complainant is entitled for the remedy as prayed? 2. Relief and cost. The evidence in this case consists of the Ext.A1. Issue Nos.1 & 2 The admission of opposite parties shows that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying an amount of Rs.5750/-. They further admit that some deficiency also was caused. Ext.A1 is the surrender certitificate. So we are of the opinion that some deficiency was caused in supplying refilled gas cylinder within time for which all the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable. So they are bound to refund Rs.5750/- to the complainant. Issues are answered accordingly. In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.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 is at liberty to execute the order against the opposite parties under the provisions of consumer protection Act. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1.Receipt dt.20.11.06 issued by Manager, Neethi store,Kavinmoola. Exhibits for the opposite parties: Nil Witness examined for either side: Nil /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur