STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                                   UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW

                                       APPEAL NO. 3050 OF 2016

              (Against judgment and order dated 02-09-2016 in Complaint

             Case No. 40/2013 of the District Consumer Forum, Faizabad )

G. D. Indane Gas Service

Civil Lines

Faizabad

Through its Proprietor

                                                                                         ...Appellant

                                                           Vs.

Smt. Kukanya Sharma

W/o Late Shanty Bhushan Sharma

R/o 07/15/430, Janora Faizabad

Pargana Haveli Avadh

Tehsil and District Faizabad

                                                                                                ...Respondent

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

HON’BLE MRS. BAL KUMARI, MEMBER

For the Appellant                 :    Sri Vikas Agarwal, Advocate.

For the Respondent              :    Smt. Sukanya Sharma in person.                 

Dated : 09-03-2017

                                                  JUDGMENT

          MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT (ORAL)

This is an appeal filed under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 before State Commission against judgment and order dated 02-09-2016 passed by District Consumer Forum, Faizabad in Complaint Case No. 40 of 2013 Smt. Sukanya Sharma V/s G.D. Indene Gas Service and others whereby District Consumer Forum has allowed complaint partially and ordered opposite parties to give gas connection to complainant on payment of Rs.2,060/- within two months from the date of judgment subject to condition that the increased price if any shall be paid by opposite parties. The District Consumer Forum has further ordered opposite parties to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental harassment and Rs.3,000/- as cost of litigation within two months.

Mr. Vikas Agarwal, learned Counsel appeared for appellant.

Respondent appeared in person.

:2:

We have heard both parties and perused impugned judgment and order as well as records.

Learned Counsel for appellant has contended that impugned judgment and order is against fact as well as law.

Respondent has supported judgment and contended that the appeal is without merit.

We have considered submissions made by parties.

According to complaint version of respondent/complainant is that she applied for domestic gas connection in the office of opposite party no.1 and completed formalities. Thereafter a letter dated 05-12-2012 was given to her by opposite party no.1 whereby Rs.2,060/- were demanded by opposite party no.1 for the connection but when she contacted opposite party no.1 in pursuance of said letter for connection, he made oral demand of Rs.6,600/- in addition to Rs.2,060/- demanded by above letter and did not give her connection to press his illegal additional demand.

Opposite parties filed written statement before District Consumer Forum and opposed complaint. In written statement they have stated that on inspection it was found that the complainant had already a gas connection in her house. As such she was not entitled to second gas connection under policy of Government of India.

In written statement opposite parties have further stated that respondent/complainant is not a consumer under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

After having considered pleadings of parties and evidence on record the District Consumer Forum has recorded finding that complainant is consumer and appellant opposite parties have committed deficiency in service. As such District Consumer Forum has allowed complaint partially and passed order as mentioned above.

Appellants/opposite parties have failed to give details of alleged previous gas connection of respondent/complainant. As such they have no sufficient ground to refuse connection to respondent/complainant. The findings recorded by District Consumer Forum cannot be said to be against fact and law.

:3:

During course of hearing learned Counsel for appellant submitted that the respondent/complainant should be directed to complete formalities for the connection. Respondent/complainant submitted that she is ready to complete formalities if any required by rules and regulations.

In view of discussion made above we are of the view that the appeal should be dismissed.

Appeal is dismissed accordingly.

Parties shall bear their own costs in appeal.

Rs.4,000/- deposited in appeal under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 shall be remitted to District Consumer Forum for disposal according to law.

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties within 15 days positively as per rules.

                                                                   ( JUSTICE A H KHAN )

                                                                                    PRESIDENT

                                                                    ( SMT. BAL KUMARI )

                                                                                        MEMBER

          Pnt.