DOF.30-11-2012
DOO.06-06-2013
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR
Present: Sri.K.Gopalan: President
Dated this, the 6th day of June 2013
C.C.No.399 /2012
CC.Krishnan,
Palathil House,
Kayralam Amsom,
P.O.Mullakkodi,
Taliparamba Taluk Complainant
1. Neethigas,
Office of Mayyil Service co.op.Bank,
P.O.Mayyil.
2. Secretary,
Mayyil Service co.op.Bank,
P.O.Mayyil.
3. Managing Director,
Kerala State Co.op.Consumer Federation, Opposite parties
Gandhi Nagar, Kochi.
O R D E R
Sri.K.Gopalan, President
This is a complaint filed under section12 of the consumer protection Act for getting an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.5750 with interest and cost
The case of the complainant in brief is as follows: The complainant has taken cooking gas connection from the opposite parties through the Neethi Store. At the time of taking the connection he has paid Rs.5750. 2nd opposite party/Bank promised the complainant to refund the same at the time when the connection happened to be surrendered. The cooking gas distribution by the opposite parties later on became irregular and the quality also deteriorated, when it was complained to 1st opposite party they answered that 3rd opposite party is responsible for the same. Because of these reasons complainant surrendered the connection demanding to refund the amount of Rs.5750. But the amount was not refunded by them. Hence this complaint.
Pursuant to the notice 3rd opposite party sent their version but did not made appearance.
The version of 3rd opposite party admitted the facts but blamed each other for the faults happened to be taken place resulting in the stoppage of distribution of cooking gas.
3rd opposite party has also explained the social activities and their services to the consumers during the last several years as they were dealing with the distribution of domestic goods and prayed considering those aspect to dismiss the case against them penalizing Koldy Petroleum who allegedly stopped supply of cookinggas abruptly.
Complainant adduced evidence by way of affidavit evidence and marked Ext.A1 and A2.
The main issue to be considered is whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of opposite parties.
The evidence adduced by complainant including Ext.A1 receipt issued by the Mayyil Service co-op bank/2nd opposite party and
Ext.A2 issue as the receipt receiving the cylinders and regulator goes to show that the complaint has deposited Rs.5750 at the time of taking cooking gas connection and he had surrendered two cylinders and one regulator at the time of surrendering the connection. It is an admitted fact that complainant had paid the amount. Opposite parties have no case that the amount is refunded. The available evidence makes it certain that the distribution of coking gas was stopped and complainant has no other way except surrendering the same. Hence it is evident that there is deficiency in service in the joint venture of the opposite parties. The opposite parties are liable to refund the amount of Rs.5750 deposited by the complainant. No cost is ordered considering the peculiar situation and thus the issue is answered partly in favour of the complainant and order passed accordingly.
In the result, complaint is allowed 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 allowed to execute the order against the opposite parties under the provisions of consumer protection Act.
Sd/-
President
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the complainant
A1& A2.Certificates dated 19.11.12 issued by OP
Exhibits for the opposite parties: Nil
Witness examined for either side: Nil
/forwarded by order/
Senior Superintendent
