Kerala

Kannur

OP/119/2006

P.Harinarayanm , Thazhakurunth, Kankol Po. PNR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary , Kankol Service Co-Op Bank Ltd. Kankol - Opp.Party(s)

Vinod Kumar

04 Oct 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. OP/119/2006

P.Harinarayanm , Thazhakurunth, Kankol Po. PNR.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Secretary , Kankol Service Co-Op Bank Ltd. Kankol
2.Manager Southern Gas Point Po.Chittariparamba,KNR
...........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

4.10.08 K.P.Preethakumari, Member This is a complaint filed under section1 2 of the consumer protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.5180/- with 12% interest from January 2005 and Rs.25000/- as compensation and cost. The complainant alleged that he had booked for gas connection on 19.5.2000 by paying an amount of Rs.5180/- to 1st opposite party. The gas was supplied by 2nd opposite party. The 1st and 2nd opposite parties were supplied the gas under the name and style of ‘Neethi Gas’ which was controlled by 1st opposite party. The refilled gas cylinder was supplied up to and inclusive of January 2005. There after the complainant had not received the refilled gas cylinder. While the complainant had enquired about the non receipt of refilled gas cylinder the 1st opposite party explained that 2nd opposite party was not supplying gas cylinder regularly and hence they were not in apposition to supply the gas. More over the gas supplied were of substandard in quality and quantity and the price was also increased inordinately. The refilled cylinder was also not properly sealed. Because of these reason he had issued Ext.A2 notice to both opposite parties by calling upon them to refund the deposited amount of Rs.5180/- and to receive the cylinder and regulator. Instead of refunding the 1st opposite party had issued A7 reply stating unnecessary contentions. Hence this complaint After receiving notice from the Forum both opposite parties were filed version. Later on they are absent and set exparte. The 1st opposite party filed version as follows: The 1st opposite party denied the contentions that the complainant had given Rs.5180/- on 19.5.2000 for availing a gas connection and had given receipt to that effect. This opposite party further denied the contentions that it was made believe to the complainant that the connection was of a Neethi gas which was under the control of the 1st opposite party. The 1st opposite party is a co-operative banking institution and some persons had paid money in the Account maintained by Southern gas Point with the 1st opposite party and hence the 1st opposite party relation with 2nd opposite party is only a business relation. The 1st opposite party has no connection with the gas supply and hence this opposite party is unnecessary arrayed as a party. So the 1st opposite party has no liability to pay any amount to the complainant or to any other persons and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. From the above contentions the following issues are raised for consideration 1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of 1st opposite party? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed? 3. Relief and cost. The evidence in the above case consists of Exts.A1 to A7. Issues 1 to 3 The Ext.A1 shows that the same was issued by 2nd opposite party and the deposit amount was received by 1st opposite party. Ext.A2 to A7 is the lawyer notice, postal receipts, acknowledgement and the reply notice. Perusal of all these documents reveals that the complainant had availed a gas connection by giving an amount of Rs.5180/- to the 1st opposite party and the connection was supplied by 2nd opposite party. The complainant contended that 2005 onwards the refilled gas cylinder was not obtained to him. So there is some deficiency on the part of opposite parties for which both the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to refund the amount of Rs. 5180/- to the complainant with Rs.500/- being the cost. In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.5180/- (Rupees Five thousand One hundred and eighty only) with Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only) as costs of these proceedings to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is allowed to execute the order against the opposite parties under the provisions of the consumer Protection Act. The complainant is also directed to surrender the cylinder and regulator to 2nd opposite party on receipt of the amount. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1Receipt dt.25.5.2000 issued by OP2 to complainant A2. Copy of the lawyer notices sent to Ops dt.17.3.05 A3 & A4.Postal receipts A5 & A6. Postal acknowledgement card A7.Reply notice sent by OP1 Exhibits for the opposite parties Nil Witness examined for either side Nil /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur Date of Despatch of this order By Post/hand




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