Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/157/2016

M/s.R.S.Mangala Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Venugopal - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.D.Ramesh

28 Nov 2022

ORDER

                                            Date of Complaint Filed : 20.04.2016

                                            Date of Reservation        : 02.11.2022

                                            Date of Order                   : 28.11.2022

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT: TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                              : PRESIDENT

                     THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,             :  MEMBER  I 

                    THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,       : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.157 /2016

MONDAY, THE 28^th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

Mr.R.S. Mangala kumar,

S/o Era.Soundra Pandian,

No.81, T.M.Masitry Street,

Thiruvanmiyur,

Chennai – 600 041.                                                                                                                               ...  Complainant            

..Vs..

Mr.Venugopal,

Prop.Lans Service Station,

(HPC Dealers),

26, Greenways Road,

R.A.Puram,

Chennai – 600 028.                                                                                                                                ...  Opposite Party

******

Counsel for the Complainant          : M/s. D.Ramesh

Counsel for the Opposite Party      : M/s. K. Ramu

 

On perusal of records and upon hearing the oral arguments of the Counsel for the Complainant and the Counsel for the Opposite Party, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the Opposite Party to pay a sum of Rs.13,287/- being the amount incurred for repairing the vehicle and for towing the vehicle and to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony caused by the Opposite Party for the wrongful, illegal act, deficient service and unfair trade practice committed by the Opposite Party along with cost of Rs.10,000/-.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The Complainant  is owning a Volkswagen Polo car bearing Registration No.TN 07 BU 3333(Model 2012). On 07.11.2014, while he was returning in his car along with his friend Mr. S.Vijayashankar after finishing his professional work to his residence, he halted his car at the Opposite party fuel service station located at R.A Puram Greenways Road at about 11.00 PM for filling up the diesel had filled up diesel in the tank for Rs.2,240 about 40 litres at the Opposite party fuel service station on the next day ie on 8.11.2014 while he was proceeding from his residence to his office in his car, the vehicle stopped abruptly in the middle of the road at Santhome High Road, Chennai near Foreshore Estate Signal. the Complainant hac called the authorized dealer for Volkswagen car namely Sundaram Motors at Whites Road, Chennai  The service mechanic, who attended the car on road itself found and reported that the engine of the car had stopped instantly while running due to "Fuel adulteration". Thereafter the Complainant with great difficulty engaged  Sri Thirumalai Baghawan Recovery Van & Crane Services, Chernai to to his car from the Santhome High Road to the service station of Sundaram Motors situated at Whites Road, Chennai. The Complainant had filed a complaint before the Inspector of Police, E-5 Foreshore Estate Police station, Chennai stating the above said episode, on the same day i.e., station, Chennai stating the above said episode, on the same day i.e., 8.11.2014 at 20.50 hrs along with the sample of diesel in one litre bottle taken out from the fuel tank of the car of the complainant. The Complainant further respectfully submits that the authorized Volkswagen car dealer Sundaram Motors, Service Manager/Technical section has also intimated to him through email on 11.11.2014 that the sudden Jam of the engine of the car which resulted in the car stopping abruptly while it was on motion, was on account of fuel adulteration. Immediately on the same day i.e., 11.11.2014 the complainant had also sent a e-mail petition to the Inspector of Police, E-5 Foreshore Estate Police Station. Chennai through email seeking expeditious action on his complaint The Sub-Inspector of Police conducted enquiry on the aforesaid complaint submitted by the Complainant, which the Opposite party Manager Mr.Babu participated in the said enquiry and admitted that diesel has been filed up by the Complainant in the Opposite party fuel service station. The Sub-Inspector of Police took sample of diesel in one litre bottle from the Opposite party fuel service station and compared the same with the sample of diesel in one litre bottle taken from the fuel tank of the car of the Complainant which was already given to the Inspector of Police at the time lodging the complaint. On such visible comparison it was clearly found that the sample of diesel in one litre bottle taken from the fuel tank of the car of the Complainant is an adulterated one. Consequently the above complaint lodged by the Complainant dated 08.11.2014 before the Inspector of PoliceE-5 Foreshore Estate Police Station Chennai was forwarded to the office of Additional Director General of Police-Civil Supplies, Nandanam, Chennai for further action also registered FIR in Crime No.429/14 dated 08.12.2014 for the offences punishable under section 2(e)(VI) of Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel Prevention of Malpractice in Supply and Distribution)order 1998 r/w 7(1)(ii) of EC Act 1955. he has also lodged a complaint against the opposite party fuel station with the HCPL retail outlet regarding the same, for which one Mr. Meeraj Area Sale Manager conducted enquiry and later promised the Complainant by stating that action will be taken against the Opposite party.

 The Complainant respectfully states that his vehicle has been delivered to him on 27.11.2014 by Volkeswagen Car authorized dealer Sundaram Motors, service station after completion of the repair work. The expenditure incurred for the completion of the repair work was a sum of Rs.11,287/-. The expenditure incurred for towing the vehicle from Santhome High Road to Sundaram Motors service station was a sum of Rs.2000/- Further more on account of the non availability of the vehicle from 08.11.2014 to 27.11.2014 the Complainant's professional work has been suffered and he was put to lot of inconvenience. Due to the non availability of his own vehicle the Complainant was forced to hire car. he reliably learnt that similar to his above said incident, a Volkeswagen Vento TDI car bearing no.TNO6E 6465 owned by Madras Cement company was also met the same bad experience and was under repair in the same Volkeswagen Car authorized dealer Sundaram Motors, service station for the same complaint due to fuel adulteration caused by the Opposite party fuel station. The act of supplying adulterated diesel to the Complainant by the Opposite party tantamounts not only to cheating which is an offence but also deficiency  of service and unfair trade practice.  Hence the complaint.

3. Written Version filed by the Opposite Party in brief is as follows:-

This opposite party admits the claim of the complainant of filling up diesel for Rs.2,240/- being 40 liters of diesel at 11.00pm on 07.11.2014 alone.   The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Civil supplies CID Chennai at the instance of the complainant took samples from the dispensing pump of Diesel from this opposite party retail outlet on 09.12.2014. Till date no adverse report has been found and or given by the police department based on the sample of diesel taken.  No action has been initiated by any authorities whether police department, Civil Supplies CID Department, or the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., against this opposite party till date as the diesel dispensed by this opposite party at its retail outlet was pure and un-adulterated.  At the instance of the complainant, samples of diesel from the retail outlet of this opposite party was taken by the police department and the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd, and none have till date found any discrepancy in the genuineness of the diesel supplied since the same was unadulterated stuff and not adulterated as falsely claimed by the complainant. On 07.11.2014 this opposite party received 18000 litres of fresh diesel stock, which was off loaded only by around 7.00 P.M. On arrival as per the guidelines/procedures stock check verification and density test for purity was done and entered in the register maintained on regular basis. If the case of the complainant is true then all the vehicles which were dispensed with entire stock of 18000 litres of diesel on 07.11.2014 and 08.11.2014 would have been affected. But none had any complaints like the complainant. This proves that the diesel dispensed by this opposite party was not adulterated. There are elaborate procedures and guidelines put in place by all the public sector petroleum companies with checks in place and adulterations is not possible. Registers are maintained at all outlets to enter figures regarding stock verification and density checks, which is done on day to day basis at 8.00 AM every morning. This is a record which is periodically checked by the HPCL authorities. All required registers and records are maintained by this opposite party and provided for scrutiny and inspection to higher authorities. Periodically the quality of product dispensed with, is checked by HPCL officials which is surprise check without any prior intimation. They also have mobile labs with them to check the quality of the products. Likewise periodical surprise checks are made by independent  mobile labs, which is an industrial lab and operated by M/s. Indian Oil Corporation, which is a third party agency. It is submitted HPCL makes periodical test from the storage tanks. The oil tankers are sealed and sent by HPCL The petroleum products in oil tanker is also fixed with a lock, where one key is with the storage department office of HPCL and another key with us. On receipt of the fuel load, the seal is checked and only if the seal is found not to be tampered or not broken, the lock in the oil locker would be opened by the staffs and thereafter the said stock of diesel or petrol is filled in the underground storage tank of this opposite party's retail outlet. The underground storage tank is installed only by HPCL. As per the operation guidelines as stated supra, we have put up a kiosk which have the equipment to verify the genuineness of the product in our retail outlet. Any/every customer has open access to the same as it is kept near the dispensing pump and anybody is entitled to use the same to check and verify and satisfy themselves of the genuineness of the product sold. In addition the kiosk also contains measuring can and any customer can have the same used to check the dispensing pump regarding the quality and correctness of the product measure. The entries made by the opposite party which has to be statutorily maintained at the Retail petrol outset will disclose receipt of stock, stock position, and density of the product sold. This is made on day to day basis at 8.00 A.M every day and in addition whenever during the day the stock is received but entries are made then and there, to ensure the quality of stocks received. In case of any adulteration the same, the same will be reflected in the density test and also by stock variation. Thus there are fool proof method in place. The complainant has not produced any proof to show that the complainant vehicle was affected only due to alleged adulterated diesel purchased from this opposite party. In fact the HPCL on the basis of the complaint received from the complainant made a surprise check on 29.11.2014 and verified stock and quality of the product in the retail outlet of this opposite party and found the quality to be satisfactory.  The said company M/s.Madras Cement Company is still our permanent customer of repute for the last several years, and the said company vehicles fill up their fuel requirement from this opposite party till date.  Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.       

4.   The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents marked as  Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-13 . The Opposite Party submitted his Written Version and Proof Affidavit of Opposite Parties documents were marked as Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-14.

Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1:

        The undisputed facts are that the Complainant had filled up diesel for his car on 07.11.2014, at about 11.00 pm for Rs.2,240/- from the Opposite Party as evident from Ex.A-1. The dispute arose when the engine of the car ceased which according to the Complainant is due to fuel adulteration, filled by the Complainant at the Opposite Party fuel station.

        The Complainant contended that on 07.11.2014 at about 11.00 pm he halted his car at the Opposite Party fuel station for filling up the diesel and had filled up 40 litres of diesel in the tank for Rs.2240/- and proceeded to his residence located within 5 kms from the Opposite Party fuel station. The next day i.e., on 08.11.2014 while he was going to his office in his car, the vehicle stopped abruptly in the middle of the road. The Complainant had contacted the authorised dealer namely Sundaram Motors and the service mechanic of Sundaram Motors who attended the car reported that cessation of engine was due to fuel adulteration. Hence the Complainant had filed a complaint before the Inspector of Police, E-5 Foreshore Estate Police Station, Chennai on 08.11.2014 at 20.50 hours along with the sample of diesel taken out from the fuel tank of the Car of the Complainant. The Sub Inspector of Police conducted enquiry and took sample of diesel from the fuel service station and compared the same with the sample of diesel given by the Complainant. Further submitted on visible comparison having found the fuel sample given by the Complainant to be adulterated the Inspector of Police had forwarded the complaint to the Additional Director General of Police, Civil Supplies, Nandanam, Chennai forwarded to the Inspector of Police, Civil Supplies. C/D Patravakkam, Chennai, who lodged FIR in Crime No.429/2014 dated 08.12.2014 for the offence punishable U/S 2(e) (VI) of Motor spirit and High Speed Diesel (Prevention of Malpractice in supply and distribution) order 1998 r/w 7 (i) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The Complainant had also lodged a complaint against the Opposite Party with the HCPL retail outlet. Further submitted that only because of the adulterated fuel supplied by the Opposite Party the engine of his car got damaged, which incurred a sum of Rs.22,287/- for repair. The Complainant and his family had to suffer due to non-availability of car. The Complainant had issued a legal notice dated 30.12.2014 to the Opposite Party claiming damages and compensation which evoked no response.

        The contention of the Opposite Party is that the Complainant had filled up 40 litres of diesel for Rs.2,240/- at 11.00 pm from their outlet,  based on the complaint of the Complainant, the Sub-Inspector took sample of diesel from the retail outlet of the Opposite Party. Further the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Civil Supplies C/D, Chennai took samples from the retail outlet on 09.12.2014. But no adverse report has been found or given by the Police department, Civil Supplies C/D Department or the HPCL  on the sample of diesel taken. Further submitted that the Opposite Party is located in prominent location having high volume of sales except the Complainant no other person had made complaint against this Opposite Party. The Complainant could have purchased adulterated diesel from other outlets which would have created problems in the long run.

        As regards the contention of the Complainant that his car stopped abruptly on the road was due to adulteration of fuel supplied by the Opposite Party, the Complainant relied upon the view of service Mechanic who attended the car and the e-mail dated 11.11.2014 issued by the Sundaram Motors, Authorised dealer of Volkswagon car who intimated the Complainant that the sudden jam of the engine of the car which resulted in stoppage of car abruptly on road was on account of fuel adulteration. Further though the Complainant had submitted that an FIR was lodged in Crime No.429/14, on 08.12.2014 for the offences  punishable U/s 2 ( e ) (VI) of Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel (Prevention of Malpractice in supply and Distribution) order 1998 r/w 7(1) (a) (ii) of the Act, 1995, there is procedure to be followed u/s 7 and 8 of the said Act.

Sec.7 reads as

(1) Any Gazetted Officer of the Central Government or a State Government or any Police office not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police duly authorised, by general or special order of the Central Government or a State Government, as the case may be, or any officer of the oil company,  not below the rank of sales officer, may, with a view to securing compliance with the provisions of this order, or for the purpose of satisfying himself that this order or any order made there under has been complied with or there is reason to believe that all or any of the provisions of this order have been and are being or are about to be contravened.

(a) stop and search any place or premises of a dealer, transporter, consumer or any other person who is an employee or agent of such dealer or transporter or consumer,

(b) stop and search any person or vehicle or receptacle used or intended to be used for movement of the product;

(c ) take samples of the product and seize any of the stocks of the product and the vehicle or receptacle or any other conveyance used or suspected to be used for carrying such stocks and thereafter take or authorise the taking of all measures necessary for securing the production of stocks or items so seized before the Collector or District Magistrate having jurisdiction under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and for their safe custody pending such production;

(d) inspect, seize and serve with, such aid or assistance as may be necessary, books, registers, any other records or documents of the dealer, transporter, consumer or any other person suspected to be an employee or agent of the dealer, transporter or consumer;

(2) While exercising the power of seizure provided under sub-clauses (c) and (d) above, the authorised officer shall record in writing the reasons for doing so and a copy of such recording shall be provided to the dealer, transporter, consumer or any other concerned person, as the case may be.

(3) The provisions of section 100 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), relating to search and seizure shall, as far as may be, apply to searches and seizures under this Order.

 Sampling of Product

 

(1) The authorised under clause 7 shall draw the sample from the tank, nazde, vehicle or receptade, as the case may be, in clean aluminum containers, to check whether density and other parameters of the product conform to the requirements of Bureau of Indian Standard specifications number IS 2796 and IS 1460 for motor spirit and high speed diesel respectively. Where samples are drawn from retail outlet, the relevant tank-truck sample retained by the dealer as per cause 3 (b) would also be collected for laboratory analysis.

(2) The authorized officer shall take and seal six samples of 1 litre each of the motor spirit or three samples of 1 litre each of the high speed diesel. Two samples of motor spirit or one of high speed diesel would be given to the dealer or transporter or concerned person under acknowledgement with instruction to preserve the sample in his safe custody till the testing or investigations are completed. Two samples of Motor Spirit or one of High Speed Diesel shall be kept by the concerned oil company or department and the remaining two samples of Motor Spirit or one of High Speed Diesel would be used for laboratory analysis;

 

(3) The sample label shall be jointly signed by the authorised officer who has drawn the sample, and the dealer or transporter or concerned person or his representative and the sample label shall contain information as regards the product, name of retail outlet, quantity of sample, date, name of the authorized officer, name of the dealer or transporter or concerned person or his representative;

(4) The authorised officer shall forward the sample of the product taken won ban days to any of the laboratories mentioned in Schedule III or to any other such laboratory when it may be notified by the Government in the Official Gazette for this purpose, for analysing with a view to checking whether the density and other parameters of the product conform to the requirements of Bureau of Indian Standard specifications number IS 2796 and IS 1460 for motor spirit and high speed diesel respectively.

(5) The laboratory mentioned in sub-clause (4) shall furnish the test report to the authorised officer within twenty days of receipt of sample at the laboratory

(6) The authorised officer shall communicate the test result to the dealer or transporter or concerned person and the oil company, as the case may be, within five days of receipt of test results from the laboratory for appropriate action.

        As per the above provisions, samples of the product had to be taken by the Authorised officer in the presence of the dealer, which had to be sent to the laboratory and the test report is to be submitted within 20 days by the laboratory to the Authorised Officer within 5 days to the dealer, which is not done in this case. The contention of the Complainant that by visible comparison of the sample taken from the retail outlet and the sample of diesel taken from the car it was found that the sample of diesel taken from his car was adulterated is not acceptable.

        When the Complainant alleges adulteration of fuel supplied by the Opposite Party he ought to have followed proper procedure for proper analysis or testing of the fuel and obtain test report in order to arrive a decision. Without proper analysis or test report from appropriate laboratory, and in the absence of expert evidence, merely on the fact that by visible comparison of the sample taken from the car of the Complainant it was found to be adulterated and that FIR came to be lodged against the Opposite Party, this Commission cannot determine the issue of adulteration of fuel.

        The Opposite Party placed reliance on the Judgement of the Supreme Court reported in (2013) 12 SCC 278, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd Vs. Jagannathth and company and others, where the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., and others Vs. Super Highway Services and another was referred which observes that the dealer should be given prior notice regarding the test so that he or his representative also can be present when the test is conducted, which notice is essential in view of the possibility of manipulation in the conduct of the test if it is conducted behind the back of the dealer. Further the Opposite Party relied on the Judgement of the Supreme Court reported in (2010) 3 SCC 321, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation L:td and Others Vs. Super Highway Services and Others,   where it was held that service of notice regarding the laboratory test to be conducted to the dealer of essential, which cases deals with giving of prior notice to the dealer before taking samples of the fuel, whereas in the present case  the Complainant has not produced expert evidence to prove his case of adulteration of fuel by the Opposite Party. The Complainant had failed to prove that the fuel supplied by the Opposite Party to the Complainant was adulterated fuel which caused cessation of engine of the car of the Complainant. Therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party. Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered against the Complainant.

Point No.2 & 3:

We have discussed and decided that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party and thereby Complainant is not entitled to get the reliefs as claimed in the complaint and for any other relief/s. Accordingly, Point Nos. 2 and 3 are answered.

In the result the complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 28^th of November 2022.

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

Ex.A1	08.11.2014	Receipt for purchase of Diesel
Ex.A2	08.11.2014	Bill issued by Sri Thirumalai Baghawan Recoevery Van & Crane services
Ex.A3	08.11.2014	Job card issued by Sundaram Motors
Ex.A4	08.11.2014	Complaint filed by the Complainant
Ex.A5	08.11.2014	C.S.R receipt
Ex.A6	11.112014	Email sent by the service station to the Complainant
Ex.A7	11.11.2014	Email sent by the Complainant to the  Inspector of Police, E-5 Police Station, Chennai
Ex.A8	17.11.2014	Email sent by the Complainant to the Inspector of Police, E-5 Police Station, Chennai
Ex.A9	22.11.2014	E-mail sent by the  service station  to the Complainant
Ex.A10	22.11.2014	Email sent by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd to the Complainant
Ex.A11	08.12.2014	First Information Report
Ex.A12	30.12.2014	Advocate notice issued by the Complainant to the Opposite Party
Ex.A13	01.01.2015	Acknowledgement card from Opposite Party

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:-

Ex.B1	31.10.2014	Retail outlet inspection report issued by M/s. HPCL to the Opposite Party
Ex.B2	07.11.2014	Daily Credit Analysis of the Opposite Party
Ex.B3	07.11.2014	Report issued by M/s. HPCL to the Opposite Party
Ex.B4	08.11.2014	Report issued by M/s. HPCL to the Opposite Party
Ex.B5	29.11.2014	Retail outlet inspection report issued by M/s. HPCL to the Opposite Party
Ex.B6	Nov 2014	Sundry Debtors viz., list of regular Customers of the Opposite Party
Ex.B7	09.12.2014	FIR issued by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tambaram.
Ex.B8	20.01.2015	Mobile Lab Test Report for High Speed Diesel issued by M/s. HPCL to the Opposite Party
Ex.B9	20.01.2015	Mobile Lab Test Report for Motor Spirit issued by M/s. HPCL to the Opposite Party.
Ex.B10	20.01.2015	Mobile Lab Test Report for Quantity Checks issued by M/s. HPCL to the Opposite Party
Ex.B11	03.02.2015	Mobile Lab Test Report for Motor Spirit issued by M/s. HPCL to the Opposite Party.
Ex.B12	03.02.2015	Mobile Lab Test Report for High Speed Diesel issued by M/s. HPCL to the Opposite Party
Ex.B13	30.11.2015	Notice issued by the Police Department Chennai-53 to the Opposite Party
Ex.B14		Copy of Photographs

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                    B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT