IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Monday the 30th day of March, 2015
Filed on 12.08.2013
Present
1.Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2.Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3.Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)
in
C.C.No.251/2013
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri. Sunilkumar 1. Prasanth Gas Agency
Mattathuveli Vandanam Building
Muhamma P.O. CMC 15, Cherthala
Cherthala
(By Adv. K.B. Anilkumar) 2. M/s. Bharath Petroleum
Corporation Ltd., LPG Plant
Territory Office, Kazhakkuttom Thiruvananthapuram
3. The Oriental Insurance Company Branch Office No.1, White House First Floor, Kadavanthara
Kaloor Road, Kochi
(By Adv. C. Muraleedharan)
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant is a customer of the Bharat Petroleum Gas. On 12.4.2012 at about 10.15 p.m. the gas cylinder which was used exploded and thereby caused severe damage to the complainant’s residence. The gas cylinder was supplied by the first opposite party. Due to the explosion the complainant suffered a financial loss of Rs.3 lakhs and above. Immediately the complainant informed about the incident to Fire Force and Muhamma Police. The GD extract of Muhamma Police and the report of the Fire Force are enclosed herewith. The above said explosion happened due to the defective gas cylinder distributed to the complainant. The opposite parties have committed breach of their obligation. There is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to recompensate the complainant for losses. Hence the complaint is filed claiming Rs.3 lakhs damages for loss and Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for mental agony.
2. Notice issued against the opposite parties 1 and 2 were served, but they did not turn up. Hence the opposite parties 1 and 2 were set exparte. The version of the third opposite party is as follows:-
The complaint is not maintainable. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. This opposite party issued a Multi Perils Policy for L.P. Gas Dealers to the first opposite party for the period from 4.4.2012 to 3.4.2013. The policy covers only accidental death or injury or property damage caused by or arising from installation of gas filled liquefied petroleum gas cylinder in the premises of the Insured’s customers or whilst such cylinders from the Insured premises are in the course of being carried for installation in the premises of the Insured’s customers or whilst such empty cylinders are in the course of being carried from the premises of the Insured’s customers to Insured premises as per Section VI(a). The case of the complainant is that the fire occurred in the gas cylinder such accident or damage are not covered by policy. Hence the complainant is not entitled to get any relief against the opposite party. Hence the complaint may be dismissed with costs of this opposite party.
3. The complainant was examined as PW1. The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A4. The third opposite party examined as RW1. Documents produced were marked as Exts.B1 and B2.
4. The points that arose for consideration are as follows:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties?
2) If so the reliefs and costs?
5. According to the complainant on 12.4.2012 at about 10.15 p.m. the gas cylinder which was used exploded and caused severe damage to the complainant’s residence. Due to the explosion, the complainant suffered a financial loss of Rs.3 lakhs and above. In order to substantiate the allegations of the complainant, he has produced Ext.A1 GD extract of Muhamma Police Station on 13.4.2012. Ext.A2 the report of the Fire Force. As per Ext.A2 the damages occurred due to the explosion of the gas cylinder is amounts to Rs. 2 lakhs. The gas cylinder was supplied by the first opposite party. The second opposite party is the company and third opposite party is the insurer. According to the third opposite party insurance company was not liable to make any payment to the complainant as per section VI (a) policy. While cross examining the complainant, he admitted that the explosion occurred after 6 days of installation. So it is clear from the deposition of the complainant that the explosion occurred not in the process of being installed. As per section VI(a) of policy, “The Insurance Company will indemnify the Insured in respect of all sums which the Insured is legally liable to pay as compensation and litigation expenses incurred by the Insured or by the Indian Oil Corporation (herein after called as Indian Oil) with the Company’s written consent in respect of accidental death of or bodily injury to any person other than a person under the Insured’s Service and /or accidental damage to property caused by or arising from installation of gas filled liquefied petroleum gas cylinder in the premises of the Insured’s customers or whilst such cylinders from the Insured’s premises are in the course of being carried for installation in the premises of the Insured’s customers or whilst such empty cylinders are in the course of being carried from the premises of the Insured’s customers to the Insured of being carried from the premises of the Insured’ customers to the Insured’s premises.” Hence it is not obligatory on the part of the third opposite party to give compensation to the complainant as the said cylinder was not in the process of being installed. The decision reported in 2014 Volume 1 CPJ page 278 in United India Insurance Company Vs. Gowramma and others squarely applicable in this case. In that case Hon’ble National Commission held that it is not obligatory on part of Insurance Company to make payment to the complainant as cylinder was not in the process of being installed. Relying the said decision, we are of the opinion that opposite parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. As per Ext.A2 the total damage assessed by the Fire Force is amounts to Rs.2 lakhs.
In the result, complaint is allowed. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) towards damages to the complainant. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards costs of this proceedings to the complainant. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the day 30th of March, 2015.
Sd/- Smt.Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Sd/- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Sunilkumar. M.M. (Witness)
Ext.A1 - Copy of the GD extract
Ext.A2 - Copy of the report of Fire Force
Ext.A3 - True copy of receipt
Ext.A4 - True copy of the letter dated 17.4.2012
Evidence of the opposite parties:-
RW1 - Vincent P.D.
Ext.B1 - Copy of the Rules and regulations of Multi Perils Policy for L.P. Gas
Dealers
Ext.B2 - Survey Report – Fire
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-pg/-
