Kerala

Kannur

CC/72/2006

O.Balan Nbr Shreyass, Poovathin Keezhil, chittariparmba, KNR , - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary, Kannavam Service Co-Op Bank Ltd. Kannavam p.o, kandoth. - Opp.Party(s)

01 Sep 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/72/2006

O.Balan Nbr Shreyass, Poovathin Keezhil, chittariparmba, KNR ,
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Secretary, Kannavam Service Co-Op Bank Ltd. Kannavam p.o, kandoth.
2.MD Kerala State Co-op Consumer Federation Lrtd.Gandhi Nagar,Cochin
Manager 1.Koldy Petroleum India Ltd, Moogilamada, Vannammada, kozhijampara, 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

1.9.08 K.P.Preethakumari, Member This is a complaint filed under section12 of the consumer protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.5750/- with interest and cost. The complainant’s averments are as follows: The complainant had availed gas connection from the 1st opposite party and the 2nd and3rd opposite parties were supplying gas as a joint venture. He had paid Rs.500/- as registration charge, and Rs.5250/- as deposit at the time of availing connection with a stipulation that the above said amount will be returned back at the time of surrendering the connection. Later on the supply of refilled gas cylinder became irregular and the gas supplied was substandard both in quality and quantity. So the complainant had surrendered the gas connection and demanded for refund but the opposite parties were not ready to refund the amount. Hence this complaint. On receiving notice from the Forum 1stand2nd opposite parties had filed version. The 1st opposite party filed version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying Rs.5750/-. But the amount was handed over to the 2nd opposite party and there caused some delay in supplying refilled gas cylinder. But the delay was due to the act of 2nd and 3rd opposite parties. Hence 1st opposite party is not liable for any deficiency and complaint is liable to be dismissed. The 2ndoppoiste party also filed version admitting that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying an amount of Rs.5750/-. Out of this amount Rs.5500/- were handed over to the 3rd opposite party, Rs.100/- to the 1st opposite party and appropriated Rs.150/- itself. The delay caused in supplying the refilled gas cylinder is not because of any act or omission on the part of 2nd opposite party but due to the withdrawal of the 3rd opposite party from supplying gas as promised. So 2nd opposite party has no liability to refund the amount and if found any liability only 3rd opposite party is liable. Upon the above contentions, the following issues were raised for consideration: 1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of the opposite parties? 2. Relief and cost. The evidence in this case consists of the oral testimony of PW1, and Ext.A1 & B1 Issue Nos. 1 & 2 The oral testimony of PW1, Ext.A1 along with the admission of the opposite parties, it is evident that the complainant had availed gas connection by paying Rs.5750/- to 1st opposite party. The 1st opposite party contended that he had handed over the amount to 2nd opposite party. 2nd opposite party contended that out of the amount Rs.5500/- was paid to 3rd opposite party, Rs.100/- to 1st opposite party and Rs.150/- was appropriated by itself. More over the opposite parties 1 and 2 admits that some deficiency was occurred in supplying refilled gas cylinders. So we are of the opinion that there caused deficiency in service of all the oppoiste parties and hence all of them are jointly and severally liable to refund the amount deposited by the complainant i.e. Rs.5750/-. Issues are answered in favour of the complainant. In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties to refund 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 consumer protection Act. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1. Receipt dt.13.10.98 issued by OP1. Exhibits for the opposite parties B1Copy of the letter dt.14.10.98 sent by OP1 to Manger, Neethy Gas Distribution depot,Thalassery. Witness examined for the Complainant PW1.Complainant Witness examined for the opposite parties Nil /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur




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