Sh.S.S. Panesar, President

1.       Sh.Satyendra Prasad alias Satinder Kumar has brought the instant complaint under section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, on the allegations that Opposite Party No.1 is retail supplier of LPG at Amritsar under Indane. The complainant is holder of one LPG Gas Connection (Domestic) vide Customer No.S25070 S.V.No.2892100 from Opposite Party. The complainant is an old consumer obtaining LPG from Opposite Party since the year 2006 and has been regularly receiving the supply against the above said gas connection from Opposite Party till January, 2015. As such, the complainant is a registered consumer of the services of LPG supply from Opposite Party and is competent to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum. When on 14.2.2015 the complainant approached the office of Opposite Party No.1 for booking for supply of refill of gas, Opposite Party refused to book the request for gas refill on the pretext that the name of the complainant is not in accordance with the name of the complainant as recorded in the Aadhar Card. It is pertinent to mention over here that in the said gas connection, the name of the complainant is mentioned as Satinder Kumar as consumer while name of the complainant is mentioned as Satyendra Prasad in the Aadhar Card of the complainant. It is also pertinent to mention over here that the actual name of the complainant is Satyendra Prasad, but inadvertently, while submitting application for obtaining the gas connection in question, the name of the complainant was written as Satinder Kumar by the staff of the Opposite Party  who filled the application form for gas connection. The complainant assured the Opposite Party that there is only spelling mistake in the name of the complainant which is bonafide and that the same was on the part of the staff of the Opposite Party, who filled the form for booking. But the Opposite Party refused to give supply of gas refill to the complainant against the said gas connection of the complainant arbitrarily and insisted to get a new gas connection in the correct name of the complainant. Since the complainant had no gas refill at his home for cooking, therefore, the complainant was left with no other  option except to obtain a new gas connection. As such, on 14.2.2015 the complainant had  to buy another gas connection in his name on payment of an amount of Rs.5300/- under compulsive circumstances vide customer No.XS20437546 S.V.No.539032063. The Opposite Party has forced the complainant illegally to buy a new gas connection taking undue advantage of necessity of the complainant for gas refill supply by using extortive method without any reasonable cause. The Opposite Party has been supplying gas refill regularly every month since long under the same name of the complainant as Satinder Kumar at the same address of the complainant for which new gas connection is issued. It is pertinent to mention over here that at the time of release of the first gas connection, the Opposite Party had received from the complainant the identity and residence proof of the complainant in which name of the complainant was mentioned as Satyendra Prasad. But due to mistake of the staff of the Opposite Party, they wrongly mentioned the name of the complainant as Satinder Kumar and there is no fault of the complainant in this. Opposite Party has refused to supply of gas refill against the old gas connection customer ID No.S35070 illegally and arbitrarily without making any reasonable enquiry and verification of the factum of the identity of complainant. As such, the Opposite Party is guilty of wrongly stopping of supply of gas refill to the complainant and use of monopolistic and unfair trade practice. It is pertinent to mention over here that besides forcing the complainant to buy new gas connection against security deposit of Rs.1600/- the complainant was also forced to buy one gas  stove, pipe, regulator, and at a very high price of Rs.5300/- as the Opposite Party refused to book and release new gas connection if the complainant does not buy gas stove, pipe from the Opposite Party.  The complainant requested the Opposite Party that since he has been consuming gas since long and that he is  already equipped with gas  stove, pipe and regulator, therefore, the complainant does not need to buy the same and the same will be of no utility for the complainant, but the Opposite Party refused to sell gas connection without gas stove and pipe. It is further pertinent to mention over here that the Opposite Party charged a very high price for the gas stove in comparison to the market  price of the same product, under compulsive circumstances, and that too without any bill despite demand by the complainant. As such, the Opposite Party is guilty of use of monopolistic and unfair trade practice. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)       Opposite Party be directed to restore the previous LPG Gas connection (Domestic) vide Customer No.S35070 S.V.No.2892100 of the complainant.

b)      Opposite Party may further be directed to refund the price for Gas Stove, Gas Pipe, Regulator sold to the complainant with new gas connection vide customer No.CX20437546 S.V.No.539032063 sold on 14.2.2015 by use of monopolistic and unfair trade practice.

c)       Opposite Party may kindly be burdened with compensation of Rs.50,000/- for use of unfair trade practice and Monopolistic Trade Practice and for undue hardship and harassment to the complainant resulting in causing undue mental pain, agony to the complainant.

d)      Costs of litigation to the tune of Rs.5,000/- may kindly also be awarded in favour of the complainant and against the Opposite Party.

e)       Any other relief to which the complainant is found entitled to under law and equity may kindly be awarded to the complainant against the Opposite Party.

Hence, this complaint.

2.       Upon notice, Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 appeared and contested the complaint by filing  separate written statement.

3.       Opposite Party No.1 filed the written reply taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the present complaint is legally not maintainable against the answering Opposite Party; that the present complaint does not disclose any cause of action against the answering Opposite Party; that the complainant has not disclosed the material facts before this Forum, hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed and the complainant is not entitled to any relief. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant obtained a new LPG gas connection in  the year 2015. The complainant himself approached the answering Opposite Party for obtaining the LPG connection after complying with the formalities and as per the specification and norms of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, as well as of Government of India for releasing new LPG Gas connections. The complainant had submitted the copy of his ID i.e. Adhaar Card, copy of bank pass book of State Bank of India alongwith declaration, which is compulsory for obtaining a new LPG gas connection. Each and every form and document was signed by the complainant after reading carefully and admitting the contents of the same to be true and correct. Moreover, all the forms were filled in by the complainant himself and the staff of the answering Opposite Party does not fill any form for the customers and there is no time with the staff  of answering Opposite Party to fill the forms. The forms are always fill by the customers. Wrong facts have been mentioned by the complainant with a view to gain sympathy from this Forum.   Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost was made.

4.       Opposite Party No.2 filed separate reply taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complainant has filed the present complaint which is misuse of the powers of this Forum with intent to defame the answering Opposite Party with oblique and malafide intent; that the present complaint is otherwise not legally maintainable against answering Opposite Party as under the dealership agreement, it is Opposite Party No.1 which is solely liable for any breach and / or default, if any committed by it, in performance with its functions  under such Indane Gas Dealership Agreement granted to Opposite Party No.1 by answering Opposite Party. On merits, it is submitted that the complainant obtained new LPG gas connection in the year 2015 and it is correct that the complainant himself approached for obtaining new gas connection with Opposite Party No.1 after complying with the formalities as per the law and as per the specifications and norms of IOC Limited as well as Government of India for releasing new LPG gas connections. The complainant had submitted the copy of his ID i.e. Adhaar Card, copy of bank pass book of State Bank of India alongwith declaration, which is compulsory for obtaining a new LPG gas connection. Each and every form and document was signed by the complainant after reading carefully and admitting the contents of the same to be true and correct. It is denied that there was any mistake made by staff member of Opposite Party No.1 in mentioning the name as ‘Satvinder Kumar’ as alleged. If any mistake is made  in mentioning wrong name, it is the complainant himself who did all this wrongs.  Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost was made.

5.       In his bid  to prove the case, complainant tendered into evidence  affidavit Ex.C1 in support of the allegations made in the complaint and also produced copies of documents Ex.C2   to Ex.C17  and closed his evidence.

6.       On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the complainant, the Opposite Party No.1 tendered into evidence the affidavit of Sh.Sh.Anuj Sikka Ex.OP1/1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP1/2 to Ex.OP1/9 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Party.

7.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the evidence on record.

8.       It is not disputed that the complainant is holder of LPG Gas Connection (Domestic) since the year 2006 bearing Customer No.S35070 S.V.No.2892100 from Opposite Party, copy of the pass book accounts for Ex.12 and the complainant went on receiving the service smoothly uptil January, 2015. But when on 14.2.2015, the complainant approached Opposite Party No.1 for gas refill, Opposite Party refused to oblige on the pretext that the name of the complainant  as per gas connection record  was shown as Satinder Kumar, whereas as per Adhaar Card, his name is entered as Satyendra Prasad. It is none of the case of the Opposite Party  that Satyender Prasad and Satinder Kumar are not one and the same person. Instead of rectifying the name of the complainant on the basis of Adhaar Card accompanied by an affidavit, the Opposite Party No.1 compelled the complainant to apply for new gas connection after charging Rs.5300/- for new gas stove, pipe, regulator and security etc. and allotted a new gas  connection bearing  customer No.XS20437546 S.V.No.539032063 dated 14.2.2015. The contention that the complainant had himself moved an application for getting new gas connection by supplying copy of Adhaar Card Ex.C3  and copy of pass book Ex.C4  does not appear to be tenable because there was absolutely no necessity for the complainant to request for the same while the stand of the complainant appear to be quite reasonable. Because it was  Opposite Party No.1  who was in a commanding position ad it compelled the complainant to apply for a fresh gas connection, under the threat of non-supply of the refill. The act and conduct of Opposite Party No.1 in refusing the refill as well as compelling the complainant to apply for fresh gas connection amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice. As such, the complaint deserves to be allowed. Opposite Party No.1 is directed to refund the amount of Rs.5300/- obtained by it for supplying the gas stove, regulator, pipe and security deposit, on receiving of gas stove, regulator and pipe against receipt. Opposite Party No.1 is also directed to restore the gas connection of the complainant to its original number forthwith. For deficient service, Opposite Party No.1 is directed to pay Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousands only) as compensation, while costs of litigation are assessed at Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousands only). Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the awarded amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of passing of order until full and final payment. Complaint against Opposite Party No.2 fails and is ordered to be dismissed accordingly. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

Announced in Open Forum