Smt.PREETHAKUMARI. K.P.<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs 5750/-with interest and cost. <br /> The complainant contended that he had availed a gas connection from the first opposite party by giving an amount of Rs 5750/-. The 2nd and 3rd opposite parties were supplying gas to the first opposite party as a joint venture. AT the time of availing connection the opposite parties assured that the deposit amount will be refunded on disconnection . The opposite parties were regularly irregular in supplying refilled gas cylinders and the quality and quantity were substandard also The first opposite party explained the complainant that opposite parties 2 & 3 are liable for this while it was brought before the attention of opposite party no.1. So he had surrendered the gas connection and demanded to refund the deposit amount. But the opposite parties were not ready to refund the same. Hence this complaint.<br /> On receiving the complaint notices were issued to the opposite parties and first and 2nd opposite parties were filed their version.<br /> The first opposite party filed version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying Rs 5750/-. The first opposite party contended that the “project” by which gas connections were supplied was introduced by opposite parties 2 & 3 and opposite party no.1 is only an agent of them. The amount collected by the opposite partyno.1 was remitted to opposite party no.2 and hence they have no liability to refund the amount and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.<br /> Opposite party no.2 also filed version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection and had received Rs 5750/-. Out of this Rs 5500/- was given to Koldy Ptroleum and Rs 100/- to the opposite party no.1 and opposite party no.2 itself appropriated RS 150/-. The failure in supplying refilled gas cylinder were due to the act of opposite party no.3 and they are liable to be penalized. <br /> On the above pleadings the following issues are raised for consideration.<br /> 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?<br /> 2. Relief and cost<br /> The evidence in the above case consists of oral tesimoy of PW1 and Exts. A1 and A2.<br /> ISSUES 1 & 2.<br /> The oral testimony of the complainant , Ext. A1 along with the admission of opposite parties 1 & 2 , it is evident that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying an amount of Rs 5750/-. Ext. A2 shows that the complainant had surrendered the gas connection . Complainant deposed that surrender of the gas connection was because of non availability of refilled gas cylinders in time and due to the substandard quality and quantity. Hence we are of the opinion that there was some deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties for which they are jointly and severally liable. So the opposite parties are liable to refund the deposit amount of Rs 5750/- to the complainant.<br /> 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 entitled to execute the order under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.<br /> Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-PRESIDENT<br /> APPENDIX <br /> Exhibits for the complainant<br /> A1. Receipt dt. 12.9.98 issued by the first oppositeparty<br /> A2. Certificate dt. 09.2.2007 issued by the first opposite party<br /> Exhibits for the opposite party – NIL<br /> Witness examined for the complainant<br /> PW1. Complainant<br /> Witness examined for the opposite party – NIL<br /> Forwarded/ by order <br /> SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />