Date of filing : 25-07-2012
Date of order : 27 -11-2012
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.236/2012
Dated this, the 27th day of November 2012
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
SMT. K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
Ahamed Kutty, S/o.Mohammed Haji, } Complainant
Arwar House, Po.Kunjathur,
Kasaragod. Dt. 671323.
(In Person)
Shobha Naik, M/s Anantha Gas Agency, } Opposite party
Hill Side Cross Road,
Near Nithyananda Bhajana Mandira,
Hosangadi, Manjeshwar.67323
(In Person)
O R D E R
SMT.P.RAMADEVI, MEMBER
The facts of the case in brief are as follows:
That the complainant is a consumer of opposite party. He booked the refill LPG cylinder on the very next day of delivery of refill cylinder every month. Usually the opposite party is delivering the gas within 22 days of every booking. But the last booking of the gas was delivered with a delay of 18 days. Due to the late delivery the complainant suffered mentally and financially. Hence this complaint is filed for a compensation of `10,000/-.
2. On receiving the notice from the Forum the opposite party appeared in person and filed her version. The opposite party denied all the allegations made against her by the complainant. The opposite party submitted that she was delivering the gas promptly to its customers. But in the above occasion a delay was caused due to the shortage of supply by the company. The said shortage of supply was due to the scarcity of water in the manufacturing unit of the company. The above fact was intimated to the complainant through letter. The delay caused is not deliberate it is beyond her control. Since there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
3. No oral evidence adduced by both parties. Ext.A1 on the side of complainant and Exts. B1 to B6 on the side of opposite party is marked.
4. Issues raised for consideration
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?
2. If so, what is the order as to costs and compensation?
5. Here on going through Ext.B3 it is very clear that the complainant was getting the refilled gas cylinder every month. The delay is come in the month of April. According to opposite party for that delay she is not responsible since it is due to the shortage of supply of gas from the company. It is evident from Ext.B4 that there was shortage of supply from the Mangalore plant. It is believable that during the month of April there is chance for scarcity of water. Moreover the reason for delay is informed to the complainant through letter i.e. Ext.B5. The version of the opposite party is believable. Moreover, the company is not made as party to this complaint.
6. As observed by the Hon’ble State Commission in Appeal No.507/09 that the distributor is directed to supply liquefied petroleum gas cylinders to the complainant within a short time subject to the availability of the stock. Here the delay is caused due to the non-availability of the stock. On going through the entire facts on records and on going through the documents filed by both the sides. We are of the opinion that there is no merit in the complaint. Moreover, there is no evidence before the Forum that during the period of non-delivery of the gas the complainant suffered mentally and financially. Therefore he is not entitled to get any compensation.
Therefore the complaint is dismissed. No order as to costs.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1.Photocopy of Refill receipt.
B1. Refill Order details
B2. Mathrubhumi daily 1-5-2012 page No.3.
B3. 9-5-12 letter sent by OP to complainant.
B4.8-6-2011 Minutes.
B5.28-04-12 copy of letter.
B6. 8-5-2012 letter sent by Shoba Naik to complainant.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/
