Punjab

Hoshiarpur

CC/14/188

Poonam - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Akal Gas Agency - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Savrit Saini

09 Feb 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM HOSHIARPUR

(3RD FLOOR, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX, HOSHIARPUR)

C.C. No. 188/02.09.2014

Decided on : 09.02.2015

Poonam aged 32 years w/o Rajesh Kumar V.P.O Sham Chaurasi Tehsil and Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

Complainant

vs.

M/s Akal Gas Agency Hoshiarpur Block-1 Village Bulhowal through its owner Balkar Singh.

Opposite party

Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum: Sh. Ashok Kumar,President.

              Mrs. Sushma Handoo,Member.

 

Present: Sh.Savrit Saini, counsel for the complainant.

             Sh.Gobind Jaiswal, counsel for the OP.

 

ORDER

PER SUSHMA HANDOO MEMBER

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 against M/s Akal Gas Agency Hoshiarpur through its owner Balkar Singh (hereinafter referred to as OP, for short) praying for a direction to the OP to return her amount of Rs.8950/- along with interest @ 12% per annum and to pay Rs.15,000/- as damages for inconvenience and harassment suffered by her and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation costs.

2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that she had taken a new gas connection from the OP on 12/11/2012 who charged amount of Rs.8,100/- from the complainant and issued a receipt no.901 for the amount of Rs.8,100/- for 2 cylinder, 1 regulator and 1 Pipe. OP also charged amount of Rs.860/- from complainant vide receipt no.3602 dated 12/11/2012 and the connection is running continuously till the next year up to the month of July. Complainant got refilled her cylinder on 2/4/2013, 3/05/2013, 26/06/2013 and lastly on 20/07/2013. She booked her next cylinder in the month of August but cylinder was not delivered to her house. After waiting for a few days complainant again approached the agency and requested to it for the same. OP assured the complainant that in a week it will deliver the Gas cylinder at her residential house. It is averred that even after waiting for a week, no Gas cylinder had been delivered on her house. Complainant again approached Gas Agency and requested to the owner that if he did not deliver the Gas on her house then it would cause great problem for them for preparing food and to do other domestic works in kitchen on gas stove. But owner again gave a wrong reply to complainant that due to some problem he did not receive the gas supply from the Godown and when he would get gas supply, he would deliver the Gas to the Complainant. But after waiting for a long period OP did not deliver the Gas in the house of complainant. After waiting a long period complainant again approached to OP for refund of her security amount but the owner of Gas agency flatly refused to the complainant two months back that this amount is non refundable. Complainant many a times approached and requested the OP for refund of her amount but all the times OP refused to hand over her security amount without any reasonable cause. This act of the OP clearly amounts to deficiency of service on its part. Hence this complaint.

3. On notice, OP filed contested written statement taking routine preliminary objections and admitted upto the last supply to re-fill the cylinder on 20.7.2013; Complainant never applied to refund her security and denied other allegations; the complainant has not impleaded Prachi Gas Bottling Private Ltd. Gas Company as party in the case though it is necessary to implead the company as said Company is liable to refund the security and the present complaint is liable to be dismissed on the ground non- rejoinder to the necessary party. On merits, it is replied that OP is ready to forward the case of the complainant to refund the security to the company if any application to refund the security is put before the agency alongwith necessary formalities. It is further replied that complainant has filed this complaint with ulterior motive to harass to the OP. In fact, the complainant neither approached the OP to refund the security nor showed any document submitted to the company or dealer.

4. Both the parties wanted to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings and proper opportunity was given to them. The complainant tendered in evidence affidavit Ex. C-1, receipt Ex. C-2 & Ex. C-3, gas consumer Ex. C-4 and closed the evidence.

5. In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, the OP tendered in evidence affidavit of Balkar Singh Ex. OP-1, copy of challan Mark OP-2 to Mark OP-4, certificate of dealership Mark OP-5 and closed the evidence.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have very carefully gone through the affidavits and documents on the file.

7. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently argued that the complainant had taken a new gas connection from OP on 12.11.2012 who charged Rs.8100/- and issued a receipt No.901 for two cylinder, one regulator and one pipe. OP also charged amount of Rs.860/- vide receipt No.3602 dated 12.11.2012. The said connection was running smoothly for next year upto July. Complainant got refilled her cylinder on 2.4.2013, 3.5.2013, 26.6.2013 and lastly on 20.7.2013. Complainant again booked cylinder in August but cylinder was not delivered to her house for which complainant approached before the agency regarding the delivery of the gas connection of her residential house and the owner of the gas agency assured her that in a week the gas cylinder will be delivered after waiting a week no gas cylinder was delivered at her house. After approaching time and again, gas cylinder was not delivered in the house of the complainant. After waiting a long time complainant approached OP to refund of her security amount but owner of the gas agency flatly refused to the complainant by saying that this amount is non-refundable. Hence complainant is entitled to the relief claimed.

8. Learned counsel for the OP has however repelled the aforesaid contentions of the learned counsel for the complainant on the ground that complainant has not impleaded Prachi Gas Bottling Private Limited, Gas Company in the case as the company is liable to refund the security amount. Hence the complaint be dismissed on the ground of non-rejoinder to the necessary party and OP is ready to forward the case of the complainant to refund the security of the complainant and he has filed the present complaint with ulterior motive to harass the OP.

9. We have anxiously considered the rival contentions in the light of evidence on record.

10. Complainant had taken a new gas connection from the OP on 12.11.2012 by paying amount of Rs.8100/- vide receipt No.901 for two cylinder, one regulator, one pipe, OP also charged an amount of Rs.860/- vide receipt No.3602 dated 12.11.2012. In support of the stand the complainant has placed on record receipt Ex.C2 amounting to Rs.8100/- and Ex.C3 amounting to Rs.860/- which go to show that complainant has paid the above said amount to the OP. Further, counsel for the complainant has placed on record copy of gas consumer Ex.C4, wherein stamp of Akal Gas Agency is there. So, complainant is consumer of OP.

11. On the other hand, OP has placed on record copy of challan Mark OP2 to Mark OP4 and photocopy of certificate Mark OP5 of dealership of Prachi Gas Bottling Private Limited Company.

12. The question before us is whether the complainant is consumer of OP or Prachi Gas Bottling Private Limited Company ? Receipts Ex.C2 and Ex.C3 amounting to Rs.8,100/- and Rs.860/- paid by the complainant to the Akal Gas agency would go to show that complainant is consumer of OP only and it is OP who alone is liable to refund the above said amount to the complainant.

13. Letter dated 18.11.2014 placed on record by OP and statement dated 20.1.2015 given by the OP qua owning that letter go a long way to admit dealership of Prachi Gas Bottling Private Limited Company in the name and style of M/s Akal Gas Agency, Bhogpur road, Bulhowal district Hoshiarpur, here OP besides proving that OP itself has written to Prachi Gas Bottling Private Company to release the security amount after cancelling its licence alongwith connection fee to enable it to refund the same to the public. Therefore, the complainant is not required to make representation to the said company through the OP. As the complainant has paid the above said amount of Rs.8,960/- to the OP hence, the OP alone is liable to refund the amount to the complainant. Since, the aforesaid amount has not been refunded to the complainant in spite of her repeated requests and personal visits so, she is also entitled to appropriate compensation and costs for harassment and mental agony besides avoidable litigation to which she has been put by the OP.

14. In view of our above observations and findings, the complaint filed by complainant is partly accepted with a direction to the OP to refund Rs.8,960/- alongwith consolidated amount of Rs.3000/- as compensation and costs of litigation within a period of 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order failing which OP shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum on the aforesaid amount of Rs.11,960/- from the date of order till realization. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room.

Announced.

09.02.2015

 

(Mrs. Sushma Handoo) (Ashok Kumar )

Member                        President

MKS