Kerala

Kannur

CC/165/2007

K.V.Kunhikannan,S/O.Govindan, Aalakattu House4,Poovathur,P.O.Koodali,Kannur .Dt - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary,Koodali Service Co Op Bank Ltd , P.O.Koodali,Kannur.Dt - Opp.Party(s)

07 Nov 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/165/2007

K.V.Kunhikannan,S/O.Govindan, Aalakattu House4,Poovathur,P.O.Koodali,Kannur .Dt
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Secretary,Koodali Service Co Op Bank Ltd , P.O.Koodali,Kannur.Dt
2.MD,Kerala State Co Op Consumer Federation Gandhi Nagar,Kochi
3.Manager,Koldy Petroleum India Moongilamada,Vannamada,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

Smt.PREETHAKUMARI. K.P This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs 5750/- with interest and cost. The complainant’s case is that he had availed gas connection from the Ist opposite party on 11.9.98 by giving an amout of Rs 500/- as registration fee and Rs 5250/- as security deposit with a stipulation that the deposited amount will be refunded at the time of surrendering the connection. The 2nd and 3rd opposite parties were providing gas as a joint venture. Later on the supply of refilled gas cylinder became irregular and that supplied were of substandard both in quality and quantity. Because of this the complainant had surrendered the gas connection and demanded for the amount. But the opposite parties were not ready to do so. Hence this complaint. On receiving the complaint, notice were issued to the opposite party. Even though they were acknowledged the same, they were not taken care to appear before the Forum. From the above pleadings, the following issues are raised for consideration. 1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of the opposite parties? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? 3. Relief and cost. The evidence in the above case consists of Exts. A1 and A2. The Ext. A1 shows that the complainant had deposited Rs 5250/- with first opposite party for gas connection and Ext. A2 shows that he had surrendered the gas connection . From the averments in the complaint it is seen that delay was caused in supplying gas and inordinately the price of gas was increased. But no contrary evidence or denial on the part of opposite party and hence it can be seen that some deficiency was caused on the part of opposite parties for which all the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate the complainant and hence the complainant is entitled to get refunded the deposited amount of Rs 5250/-. In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties to refund Rs 5250/-(Rupees five thousand two hundred and fifty only) to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Otherwise the complainant is at liberty to execute the order under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act. Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-PRESIDENT APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1. Receipt dt. 11.9.98 issued by the first opposite party A2. Certificate dt. 28.9.2007 issued by the first opposite party Exhibits for the opposite party – NIL Witness examined for the complainant-NIL Witness examined for the opposite party – NIL Forwarded/ by order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT




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