Haryana

StateCommission

A/835/2015

AJAY DABRA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHARMA GAS AGENCY - Opp.Party(s)

BY POST

05 Apr 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

 

First Appeal No.835 of 2015

Date of the Institution:28.09.2015

Date of Decision: 05.04.2017

Ajay Dabra aged 37 years son o fSh. D.R. Dabra, Advocate resident of 159/1, near Water Tank, Old Hamida, Yamunanagar at present Tagore Garden, Bye Pass Road, Yamunanagar.

                                                                             .….Appellant

Versus

M/s Sharma Gas Agency (Bharti Gas Agency) through its Manager, 36, Industrial Estate, Phase-I, Yamunanagar.

                                                                             …..Respondent

CORAM:    Mr.R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member

                    Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member

 

Present:-    None for the parties.

 

O R D E R

R.K. BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.      It was alleged by the complainant that he applied for new gas connection on 26.10.2012 and deposited Rs.2500/- on that date and balance of Rs.1925/- were deposited on 16.01.2013. Thereafter, gas cylinder, regulator, pipe etc were issued. Opposite party (in short ‘OP’) assured to replace empty gas cylinder with refill gas cylinder as and when required. Later on she visited office of OP and it was found that the same was closed.

2.      After hearing learned counsel for the complainant only because OP was proceeded against exparte complaint was dismissed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Yamunanagar (in short ‘District Forum’) vide order dated 20.08.2015 on the ground that complainant has failed to show any document vide which OP agreed to replace/refill gas cylinder.

3.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, complainant preferred this appeal.

4.      Nobody has appeared on behalf of complainant-appellant. It is already 3:00 P.M. Previously also nobody has appeared on behalf of appellant. It appears that appellant is not interested in pursuing the matter and this appeal has been filed just for a ride. This appeal is pending since the year, 2015, so, the same is being decided on merits.

5.      There is no document on the file showing that OP ever promised to supply filled cylinder to complainant as and when required. If, he has purchased cylinder from OP it does not mean that the same was bound to supply filled cylinder. Even otherwise, office of OP is closed and nobody is there. So, no directions can be issued about supply of cylinder. Findings of learned District Forum are well reasoned and based on law and facts. Resultantly, appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed.

 

April 05th, 2017

Urvashi Agnihotri, Member, Addl.Bench

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

 

R.K