Complainant William Masih through the present complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter, for short ‘the Act’) has prayed for issuance of necessary directions to the titled opposite parties to refund him the deposit of Rs.5000/- besides to pay him Rs.80,000/- as compensation for having caused mental and physical harassment, in the interest of justice.

2.   The case of the complainant in brief is that at the allurement of the opposite party no.2 he paid him Rs.5000/- for getting him the Gas Connection with the opposite party no.1 agency alongwith the facility of gas cylinder refilled as and when required by him against payments. Further the complainant has stated that he was issued the Gas Connection pass book by the OP1 agency that showed a deposit of Rs.2400/- only and he has been purchasing the gas refills against payments of Rs.480/- as and when required. However, from August, 2014 onwards; no further supply of gas refills were made to him and the OP1 agency was also closed. The OP2 was contacted but he also evaded his responsibility/liability either to refund the amount or to supply him further gas refills. Thus, the complainant was forced to file the preferred complaint against the titled opposite parties for the redressal of his grievance through the award of the desired relief as mentioned, herein above.

3.       Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared through the counsel and filed their joint written statement stating therein that he alongwith many other dealers in Punjab have been a victim of fraud perpetuated by one company namely Prachi Gas Bottling Pvt. Ltd. who has eloped after taking lacs of rupees from the dealers in Punjab and also in other parts of the country. The opposite party has further stated that a number of Civil Suits and Criminal Complaints have been filed against the fraudulent company and upon reaching any settlement with them the present complainant alongwith the others shall be refunded/paid the settled amount at that point of time. In the meantime the OP have prayed that the present complaint be dismissed in the interest of justice.    

4.                    Counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C1 and copy of passbook Ex.C2 and closed the evidence. 

5.       Counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavits of Assa Singh Ex.OP-1, Sukhdev Singh Ex.OP-7, Nand Kishore Ex.OP-10,  Sain Dass Ex.OP13, Hardeep Singh Ex.OP16 and of Gurdarshan Singh Ex.OP19 alongwith other documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP6, Ex.OP8, Ex.OP9, Ex.OP11, Ex.OP12, Ex.OP.14, Ex.OP15, Ex.OP.17, Ex.OP18, Ex.OP20 and Ex.OP21 and closed the evidence.

6.       We have carefully gone through the pleadings of both the parties; arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

7.       We find that the complainant could produce the Ex.C2 (allotted card with # 74 dated 07.07.2012) as documentary evidence for having paid a Deposit of Rs.2,400/- only and not any for the alleged amount of Rs.5,000/-. The OP vendors also admit having received Rs.2,400/- only from the complainant but in the same breath state having deposited the same in the Bank account of their principal Prachi Gas Bottling Pvt. Ltd., the producers/bottlers of Bharti Gas. The OP vendors have in turn desperately but successfully proved that they along with many other distributors/dealers all over the country have been cheated by the above named Principals against whom many civil suits and criminal complaints stood filed. However, the OPs could not produce any cogent evidence of having passed on the complainant’s deposited amount to the producers/bottlers to whom they could no doubt show having deposited amount in Lac but prior to receiving deposits from the individual consumers including the present complainant. And, that does not justify the OP’s (consumer un-friendly) role vis-a-vis the depositors including the present complainant. The OP vendors cannot be judiciously allowed to balance their losses against the depositors’ funds including that of the present complainant. Of course, the OP must have the patience to watch the law take its turn and in the meantime return the petty deposits as per the mandates of justice.   

8.       In the light of the all above, we find that there has indeed been an infringement of consumer rights but partly through the complainant’s own accrued contributions by way of not watching his interests vigilantly by paying money sans receipt and accepting receipts for Rs.2,400/- against the alleged bigger payments and opting for lesser known private cooking-gas to the established nationalized brands etc. However, we are of the considered opinion that it shall optimally meet the ends of justice if the complainant’s deposited amount gets returned along with a somewhat miniature compensation and thus we ORDER that the opposite parties shall refund/repay his deposit of Rs.2,400/- besides Rs.2,000/- as cost and compensation within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders otherwise the aggregate awarded amount shall attract interest @ 9% PA from the date of order till actually paid.   

9.          Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to records.                                                                             

             (Naveen Puri)

                                                                                    President

ANNOUNCED:                       (G.B.S.Bhullar)               (Jagdeep Kaur)

January 28, 2015.                                Member.                        Member.

*MK*