C.F. CASE No. : CC/09/18
COMPLAINANT : Sisir Basak
S/o Late Gokul Basak
Vill. Bethuadahari Station Road,
P.O. Bethuadahari,
P.S. Nakashipara,
Dist. Nadia.
– Vs –
OPPOSITE PARTIES/OPs : 1. Prop. Pradip Kumar Saha
Bishnupriya Gas Service,
Vill. Jagadanandapur,
P.O. Bethuadahari,
P.S. Nakashipara,
Dist. Nadia
: 2. Sr. Area Manager,
Kolkata Indane Office,
Indane Oil Bhaban,
2 No. Gariahat Road,
(Office), Dhakuria,
Kolkata – 700 068.
PRESENT : KANAILAL CHAKRABORTY PRESIDENT
: KUMAR MUKHOPADHYAY MEMBER
: SMT SHIBANI BHATTACHARYA MEMBER
DATE OF DELIVERY
OF JUDGMENT : 24th December, 2009.
: J U D G M E N T :
In brief, the case of the complainant is that the OP No. 1 works under the OP No. 2. It is his further case that he is a consumer under the OP No. 1. Accordingly, on 16.03.09 the OP No. 1 supplied a gas cylinder to him. At the time of delivery, weighment of the cylinder was taken at which he suspected that the weight of the cylinder was not right. So he himself made weighment of the said gas cylinder and found its weight was 29 kg 840 gms instead of 30 kg 600 gms, i.e., there was a deficit of 760 gms of gas in the cylinder. Thereafter, the complainant intimated the OP about this deficit supply of gas and to take action, but to no effect. Hence, having no other alternative he has filed this case praying for reliefs as stated in the petition of complaint.
The OP No. 1 has contested this case by filing a written version, inter alia, stating that he is a distributor of Indane Gas and the complainant is a consumer under him. It is his contention also that his men supplied a sealed cylinder full of gas to this complainant and the complainant being satisfied took delivery of the same. At the time of delivery, he did not make any complaint to the delivery man regarding the weighment of the cylinder. So no question of supplying of any deficit cylinder to this complainant does arise. Due to previous enmity the complainant has filed this case against him. Proper weighment was made in presence of the complainant before delivery and being satisfied he took delivery of the gas cylinder. After delivery no complaint or intimation was given by the petitioner to this OP. So he has no cause of action to file this case and the same is not at all maintainable in its present form and nature. Hence, it is liable to be dismissed against him.
OP No. 2, Indian Oil Corporation has also contested this case by filing a separate written version, inter alia, stating that the OP No. 1 is a distributor under him and he works independently. He has also stated that the OP No. 1 used to carry the weighing machines and it is his duty to make weighment of the gas cylinder at the time of delivery to the customer. He has also stated that the weight of the filled cylinder will be 30.600 kgs and the weight of the empty gas cylinder is 16.400 kgs and the weight of the LP gas will be 14.200 kgs. The service of delivery of the LP gas cylinder to the customer by the distributor is based on principal to principal basis service, i.e., exclusively between the distributor and the customer. So this complainant has no cause of action to file this case against the OP No. 2. Hence, it is liable to be dismissed against him.
POINTS FOR DECISION
Point No.1: Has the complainant any cause of action to file this case?
Point No.2: Has the complainant become able to prove his case?
Point No.3: Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
All the points are taken up together for discussion as they are interrelated and for the sake of convenience.
On a careful perusal of the petition of complaint along with the annexed documents and the written versions filed by the OPs and also after hearing the arguments advanced by the ld. lawyers for the parties, it is available on record, that the complainant is a consumer under the OP No. 1 with regard to LP Gas. It is also available that on 16.03.09 the OP No. 1 supplied one gas cylinder full of gas to this complainant vide Exhibit – 2. Complainant’s specific allegation is that though at the time of delivery weighment of the gas cylinder was done in his presence, but he suspected that the cylinder contained less quantity of gas than the actual amount. So he immediately made weighment of the gas cylinder and found that there was less quantity of 760 gms of gas than its actual weight of 14.200 kgs. OP’s contention is that the complainant being satisfied with the gas cylinder took delivery of the same and no complaint was made to him thereafter. At the same time, there is no document on the side of the OP to show that he supplied the gas cylinder having full quantity of gas and the complainant took delivery of the same being fully satisfied of this quantity. His specific plea is that the complainant has previous enmity with him due to which he has filed this case in order to harass him, but this OP No. 1 in his deposition has categorically stated that the complainant runs one hotel business and he is a consumer under him and besides this he has no relationship with him. Nothing is filed by him regarding the allegation of business enmity between them. At the prayer of the complainant and as per order of this Forum weighment of the cylinder was made by the Legal Metrology Department and its report is marked as ‘Exhibit’ – 1 in this case. From this Exhibit – 1 it is available that the actual weight of the gas cylinder was 26.966 kgs and the weight of the gas cylinder is 16.400 kgs and there was LP gas in the cylinder to the extent of 10.566 kgs, but the OP No. 2, Indian Oil Corporation has categorically stated in the written version that the net weight of LP gas will be 14.200 kgs and the weight of the cylinder will be 16.400 kgs, i.e., in total the weight of the cylinder full of gas will be 30.600 kgs. Here in this case we find that there was less than four kgs of gas in the gas cylinder supplied by the OP No. 1 to this complainant than its actual quantity of 14.200 kgs. At the same time the DW1, the Inspector of Legal Metrology Department has stated in his report (Exhibit – 1) that the LPG cylinder was produced before him in sealed condition and marking of the cylinder engraved as 1S3196. The OP No. 1 has taken the plea that this gas cylinder was not supplied by him but in the receipt vide Exhibit–2, the no. of the gas cylinder is not mentioned, nor it is the case of the OP No. 1 that the complainant is a consumer under any other gas distributor.
Therefore, on a careful examination of all these, we find that the disputed gas cylinder was supplied by the OP No. 1 to this complainant. It is also established that weighment of the said cylinder was done by the deliveryman at the time of delivery, but at the same time, there is no document to show that its actual weight was mentioned in the delivery receipt which are filed by both the parties. From the documents it is established that the disputed gas cylinder was not full of gas at the time of making weighment by the complainant himself or by the Metrology Inspector though it was in sealed condition. So all these facts making us to hold that the OP No. 1 supplied the defective gas cylinder to this complainant which was not full of gas. This activity of the OP No. 1 tantamounts to unfair trade practice.
In view of above discussions our considered view is that the complainant has become able to prove his case and he is entitled to get a decree as prayed for. In result the case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered,
That the case, CC/09/18 be and the same is decreed on contest against the OP No. 1 & 2. The OP No. 1 is directed to supply a fresh gas cylinder to this complainant in lieu of the old one within a period of one month since this date. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for the mental harassment caused to him due to unfair trade practice adopted by the OP No. 1 + litigation cost of Rs. 2,000/-. The OP No. 1 is further directed to pay the decretal amount of Rs. 7,000/- to this complainant within a period of one month since this date failing which the complainant is entitled to get interest upon the decretal amount @ 10% p.a. since this date till the date of realization of the full amount.
Let a copy of this judgment be delivered to the parties free of cost.
