Kerala

Kannur

CC/164/2007

K.Kamalakshmi, Koovathodan House,Payyattam,P.O.Irinav,Kannur 670301 - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary,Irinav Service Co Op Bank,P.O.Irinav - Opp.Party(s)

05 Sep 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/164/2007

K.Kamalakshmi, Koovathodan House,Payyattam,P.O.Irinav,Kannur 670301
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Secretary,Irinav Service Co Op Bank,P.O.Irinav
Managing Director,Kerala State co Op Consumer Federation Gandhi Nagar,Kochi
Manager,Koldy Petroleum India Moongilamada,Vannamada,Kozhinjampara Palakkad
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. GOPALAN.K 2. JESSY.M.D 3. PREETHAKUMARI.K.P

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


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

Smt.PREETHAKUMARI. K.P. C.C.164/2007 This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the ConsumerProtection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs 5750/-with interest and cost. The complainant alleged that she had availed a gas connection by paying an amount of Rs 5750/- with a stipulation that the amount will be refunded at the time of surrendering the gas connection. Later on the opposite parties were not ready to supply the gas within time and the supplied gas was of substandard in quality and quantity. The gas was supplied by the 2nd and 3rd opposite party as a joint venture. Because of deficient supply of gas the complainant was compelled to surrender the gas connection and demanded for deposit amount. But the opposite parties were not willing to refund the deposited amount. Hence this complaint. On receiving the complaint notices were issued to the opposite parties and they acknowledged the same. But they did not take care even to appear before the Forum. The points to be decided are whether there is any deficiency on the part of opposite parties and relief and cost. The evidence in this case consists of the oral testimony of the complainant and Exts. A1 and A2. The oral testimony of the complainant along with the Exts. A1 and A2 proves that the complainant had availed gas connection from the opposite parties by paying an amount of Rs 5750/-. It is also seen that there caused failure in supplying gas within time and hence the complainant had forced to surrender the gas connection. The opposite parties are not ready to refund the deposit amount after disconnection. So we are of the opinion that deficiency is caused on the part of the opposite parties and hence they are liable to compensate the complainant by refunding the amount. In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties to refund the deposit amount of Rs 5750/-( Rupees five thousand seven hundred and fifty only) to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute the order under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. Sd/- MEMBER Sd/- MEMBER Sd/-PRESIDENT APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1. Photocopy of the letter dt. 3.10.2007 sent by the first opposite party A2. Photo copy of the LPG consumer book issued to the complainant Exhibits for the opposite party – NIL Witness examined for the complainant PW1. Complainant Witness examined for the opposite party – NIL Forwarded/ by order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT




......................GOPALAN.K
......................JESSY.M.D
......................PREETHAKUMARI.K.P