BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 79 of 2016
Date of Institution : 17.3.2016
Date of Decision : 4.9.2017.
Mahabir Ram, aged about 50 years, son of Shri Ladhu Ram, resident of H. No.355, village Nanuana, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Rania Gas Service, Rania, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa, through its Manager/ Proprietor.
2. Indian Oil Corporation (LPG Division, through its Regional Manager at Hisar.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH. R.L.AHUJA…………………………PRESIDENT
SMT. RAJNI GOYAT ………………… MEMBER
SH. MOHINDER PAUL RATHEE …… MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Rakesh Pareek, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Abhishek Jain, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Opposite party no.2 exparte.
ORDER
The case of the complainant in brief is that complainant is the consumer of the opposite parties vide LPG connection bearing No.12806. That on 17.12.2015, the complainant brought a refill cylinder from opposite party no.1 bearing gas cylinder No.776076S and op no.1 charged a sum of Rs.625/- from the complainant and issued a cash memo No.108480 dated 17.12.2015 and also entered endorsement on consumer gas pass book/ refill received book. The complainant uses the gas cylinder for his domestic purpose i.e. for preparing meal and tea etc. That after installation of said refilled gas cylinder, he used the same only for three-four days and thereafter fire was not enlightened through said gas cylinder and gas of the said refilled cylinder was finished upon which complainant weighed the said cylinder and found that the weight of the said refilled gas cylinder was not decreased. Then the complainant checked the said refilled gas cylinder and came to know that said refilled gas cylinder is filled with water. That thereafter on 21.1.2016, the complainant by taking the said refilled gas cylinder approached to the premises of op no.1 and disclosed the fact regarding filling of water in the said gas cylinder, then the op no.1 stated to the complainant that it is only a minor problem which occurs usually and he also apprised that what happened if one cylinder out of number of cylinders has been filled with water and after deducting the weight of water, he has to pay amount of used gas and they will give a new refill of gas cylinder to him. On getting such reply of the op no.1, the complainant got stunned and stated to op no.1 that the customers have refilled the gas cylinder by paying the full amount but by sudden finishing of gas from a new refill and by giving the gas cylinder with filling of water, they are cheating the customers and playing fraud with them and also harassing them. The op no.l lost his temper and shouted upon the complainant and misbehaved with him and asked him to make payment of used gas for taking a new refill otherwise it will not be changed with new refill of gas cylinder and he refused to change the gas cylinder with new refill. Then the complainant by taking his said gas cylinder returned to home. It is further averred that thereafter on the same day i.e. 21.1.2016, the complainant moved an application to the Chief Minister, Haryana Government, Chandigarh through CM window at Sirsa, but no action has been taken against the ops. That the complainant has made several contacts with the op no.1 personally and requested for the delivery of refill cylinder but op no.1 did not pay any heed to the same. The op no.1 is the agency holder of op no.2 and thus both the ops are liable to indemnify the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite party no.1 appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections regarding suppression of material facts; maintainability; estoppal; non joinder and mis joiner of necessary parties; cause of action and locus standi etc. On merits, it is submitted that complainant was given filled gas cylinder by answering op in which condition answering op received from manufacturing company and answering op has supplied the same to the complainant after its proper checking as per norms of the company. The cylinder was in a very good condition and it was supplied to complainant to his entire satisfaction and complainant never complained the answering op regarding cylinder. The cylinder was proper sealed and packet and it cannot be tampered in any manner by answering op. Even if any defect was find out in the cylinder then complainant should made complaint to the answering op but instead of making complaint to answering op he has filed this false complaint against answering op and company malafidely and with motive to harass and humiliate the ops. Remaining contents of complaint have also been denied.
3. Op no.2 did not appear despite notice and was proceeded against exparte.
4. The complainant produced his affidavit Ex.C1, copy of refilled book Ex.C2, copy of application moved to Hon’ble Chief Minister Ex.C3, copy of application moved to Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa Ex.C4, copy of status of application Ex.C6, affidavit of one Sudarshan son of Hawa Singh Ex.C6 and copy of report of Distt. Food & Supply Controller, Sirsa Ex.C7. On the other hand, opposite party no.1 produced affidavit Ex.R1.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.
6. The complainant in support of his averments made in the complaint has placed on file his affidavit Ex.C1 wherein he has testified all the contents so set out by him in his complaint. In support, he has also placed on file copy of refilled book of the relevant date i.e. 17.12.2015 as Ex.C2, copy of application moved to Hon’ble Chief Minister on 21.1.2016 through CM Window as Ex.C3, copy of application moved to Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa Ex.C4 and affidavit of one Sudarshan son of Hawa Singh as Ex.C6. The above said documents prove the grievance of the complainant that he was so fed up with the act of the opposite party no.1 that he has to move application to the Hon’ble Chief Minister as well as Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa and ultimately has to file the present complaint. So, it cannot be said that matter was not in the knowledge of the opposite party no.1 and it cannot be said that complainant did not make any complaint regarding his grievance to the opposite party no.1. Thus, the complainant by placing on file his own supporting affidavit as well as above said documents and affidavit of Sudarshan has duly proved his case that actually he suffered harassment due to act and conduct of ops and a water filled cylinder was supplied to him by op no.1 on 17.12.2015 and he made repeated requests to op no.1 for change of cylinder but to no effect. The opposite party no.1 is the authorized agency of opposite party no.2. OP no.2 i.e. manufacturing company has opted to be proceeded against exparte. Therefore, both the ops are liable to redress the grievance of the complainant.
7. Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct both the opposite parties to supply fully refilled cylinder to the complainant without any cost subject to production of empty gas cylinder and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as composite compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Sections 25/27 of the Act against the ops. The opposite parties are also directed to ensure the fair supply of refill cylinder to the complainant in future. This order should be complied by both the ops jointly and severally. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:4.9.2017. Member Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
