Haryana

StateCommission

A/536/2016

SHREE BALAJI INDANE GRAMIN VITRAK GAS AGENCY - Complainant(s)

Versus

NEELAM RANI - Opp.Party(s)

ASHOK KUMAR KHUBBAR

26 Aug 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :      536 of 2016

Date of Institution:      10.06.2016

Date of Decision :       26.08.2016

 

Shree Balaji Indane Gramin Vitrak Gas Agency, VPO Damla, District Yamuna Nagar through Manager/owner.

                             Appellant-Opposite Party No.1

Versus

1.      Neelam Rani w/o late Sh. Ashok Kumar, Resident of Village Rattangarh, P.O. Damla, District Yamuna Nagar, Haryana.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

2.      Indane Area Office, Karnal Kohand-Assand Road, Village Gudha Karnal, District Karnal, Haryana, through M.C.

Respondent-Opposite Party No.2

 

CORAM:             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                                                                                                                                  

Present:               Shri Manish Deswal, Advocate for appellant.

                             Shri Karan Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1.

                             Shri Ashish Kapoor, Advocate for respondent No.2. 

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

          Shree Balaji Indane Gramin Vitrak Gas Agency-Opposite Party No.1, is in appeal against the order dated May 11^th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri (for short ‘the District Forum’), whereby complaint filed by complainant-respondent No.1, was accepted directing the appellant to pay Rs.7200/- compensation for not releasing gas connection to the complainant and Rs.2200/- litigation expenses etc.

2.                Neelam Rani-complainant (respondent No.1) was having domestic gas connection vide Consumer No.18425 of Indian Oil Corporation at Harihar Gas Service Amar Market, Yamuna Nagar. The Opposite Party No.2 opened a new gas agency under the name and style of “Shree Balaji Indane Gramin Vitrak at Damla, which was nearest gas agency to the complainant. The complainant got his gas connection transferred from Harihar Gas Service to Shree Balaji Gramin Vitrak at Damla in April, 2013, vide Transfer Termination Voucher, Annexure C-1. However, Shree Balaji Indane Gramin Vitrak Gas Agency, Damla-Opposite Party No.1 (appellant herein), did not release the connection to the complainant despite having submitted the required documents. Legal Notice (Annexure C-2) was also got issued through counsel. Hence, complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was filed.

3.                The opposite parties contested complaint. The opposite party No.1/appellant, in its written version stated the complainant was asked to produce the ID and residence proof for releasing the connection which he did not submit; so the connection could not be released.

4.                The opposite party No.2 in its separate reply stated that the transfer of connection to the new agency could not be completed without providing the identification and residence proof.

5.                After evaluating the pleadings and evidence of the parties, the District Forum vide impugned order allowed the complaint and issued direction as detailed in paragraph No.1 of this order. Hence appeal.

6.                Counsel for the parties have been heard. File perused.

7.                Undisputedly, the transfer voucher was issued on 25^th April, 2013. The complainant visited the office of the opposite party No.1 in the first week of May, 2013. Only plea raised on behalf of the appellant/opposite party No.1, is that the complainant did not supply the documents i.e. ID proof. Even if without going into the controversy that as to whether the complainant did not supply the documents; the present complaint was filed on 13^th August, 2013. The complainant annexed all the documents with the complaint viz Transfer Termination Voucher (Annexure C-1), copy of Ration Card (Annexure C-3), copy of Aadhaar Card (Annexure C-4) and copy of legal notice (Annexure C-2) which was got issued through Shri Karan Singh, Advocate. The connection was released on March 11^th, 2016 i.e. after three years. The opposite party No.1 had no justification at least from August, 2013 onwards when the complainant supplied all the documents to release the connection. Thus, the appellant-opposite party No.1 has rightly been held deficient in service.

8.                In view of the above, the impugned order does not require interference. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.

9.                The statutory amount of Rs.4600/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced: 26.08.2016

Urvashi Agnihotri Member

B.M. Bedi Judicial Member

CL