SECRETARY V/S MADHATHIL VISWANATHAN - Consumer Court Case

Kerala

Kozhikode

CC36/06

MADHATHIL VISWANATHAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

SECRETARY - Opp.Party(s)

14 Jul 2006

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (Notice Under Section-13 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986)(No.68 of 1986)
KOZHIKODE
consumer case(CC) No. CC36/06

MADHATHIL VISWANATHAN						...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
SECRETARY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR						...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):

1. MADHATHIL VISWANATHAN

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):

1. SECRETARY 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

By E.K. Jalaludeen Rawther, President: The complainant obtained Neethi gas connection on deposit of Rs.5750/- to the first opposite party from the second opposite party. At the time of connection the opposite parties assured that they will supply refilled gas cylinders as and when demanded. But the opposite parties refused to supply refilled gas cylinders as per the request of the complainant. Hence the complainant is seeking for the return of the deposit amount. Opposite party-1 filed a version contending that the amount received was forwarded to the second opposite party and the first opposite party is not liable for any relief. The second opposite party filed a version contending that the petition is not maintainable that the complainant is not entitled to get any amount and that the opposite party is entitled to retain the amount. The only question for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief? The case of the complainant is that after depositing Rs.5750/- the complainant obtained Neethi Gas connection of the second opposite party and at the time of giving connection the second opposite party agreed to supply refilled gas cylinders as and when demanded and contrary to their assurance, the opposite party failed to supply refilled gas cylinders as per the complainants request. Hence the complainant is seeking for the return of the amount. The second opposite party contended that the amount cannot be refunded and it is not a deposit and the opposite party is entitled to retain the amount. No authority or evidence is adduced to prove that stand. Hence we find that the complainant is entitled to get Rs.5250/-. In the result the petition is allowed and second opposite party is ordered to pay Rs.5250/- to the complainant. Pronounced in the open court this the 14th day of July 2006. Sd/- Sd/- PRESIDENT MEMBER -/True copy/- (Forwarded/By Order) (Senior Superintendent

By E.K. Jalaludeen Rawther, President: The complainant obtained Neethi gas connection on deposit of Rs.5750/- to the first opposite party from the second opposite party. At the time of connection the opposite parties assured that they will supply refilled gas cylinders as and when demanded. But the opposite parties refused to supply refilled gas cylinders as per the request of the complainant. Hence the complainant is seeking for the return of the deposit amount. Opposite party-1 filed a version contending that the amount received was forwarded to the second opposite party and the first opposite party is not liable for any relief. The second opposite party filed a version contending that the petition is not maintainable that the complainant is not entitled to get any amount and that the opposite party is entitled to retain the amount. The only question for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief? The case of the complainant is that after depositing Rs.5750/- the complainant obtained Neethi Gas connection of the second opposite party and at the time of giving connection the second opposite party agreed to supply refilled gas cylinders as and when demanded and contrary to their assurance, the opposite party failed to supply refilled gas cylinders as per the complainants request. Hence the complainant is seeking for the return of the amount. The second opposite party contended that the amount cannot be refunded and it is not a deposit and the opposite party is entitled to retain the amount. No authority or evidence is adduced to prove that stand. Hence we find that the complainant is entitled to get Rs.5250/-. In the result the petition is allowed and second opposite party is ordered to pay Rs.5250/- to the complainant. Pronounced in the open court this the 14th day of July 2006. Sd/- Sd/- PRESIDENT MEMBER -/True copy/- (Forwarded/By Order) (Senior Superintendent