DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PALAKKAD
Dated this the 16 th day of May, 2022
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya.A., Member
: Sri. Krishnankutty.N.K.,Member
Date of filing: 19/03/2019
CC/82/19
Sajeev.S - Complainant
S/o Sahadevan
Kunnuparambu House,Mudappalloor Post ,
Palakkad-678 705.
(Party in person)
Vs
Sree Narayana Gas Agencies,
Bharat Gas Distributors, - Opposite Party
Vadakkanchery Post,Palakkad-678 683.
(By Adv.V.Krishnadas)
O R D E R
By Smt.Vidya.A., Member
1.Brief facts of the complaint
The complainant took a gas connection from the opposite party with consumer number 33388 on 23/11/2018. He booked gas cylinder on the same day and got it on 28/11/2018 on payment of Rs.967/-. But the subsidy amount was not credited to his account even after one month. So he made complaints to different authorities in Civil Supplies Department and got reply that necessary action will be initiated. He received information from the District Supply Office that he is entitled to get subsidy only after activation of Aadhar in his Bank Account and it will take 3 days time for that. But he was not informed about this at the time of taking connection. He again made complaints on 11/02/2019 and got reply that his complaint is forwarded to the concerned authority for taking necessary action. But till now the subsidy amount was not credited to his account. He lost the subsidy amounting to Rs.431/- and Rs.1500/-, the travel and other expenses incurred for making complaints to the concerned authorities. All these happened because of the Deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
So this complaint is filed for directing the opposite party to pay the subsidy amount of Rs.430/- and Rs.1500/- towards the expenses incurred and Rs.20,000/- as compensation for the mental agony suffered by him.
2. Complaint admitted and notice issued to the opposite party. The opposite party entered appearance and filed their version.
3. The opposite party in their version contended that the complaint does not come within the purview of ‘consumers dispute’ as contemplated under the Consumer Protection Act and it is not maintainable. The matters alleged in the complaint does not constitute any Deficiency in service/Unfair Trade Practice. The complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary parties as the complaint had arrayed only the dealer in the party array. Central government and Bharat gas Agency are to be included in the party array and without them, proper adjudication of the complaint is not possible.
The opposite party had denied the allegations in the complaint. They contended that the consumer number 33388 mentioned in the complaint initially belonged to one Ms.Sajitha.S with Adhar No.418378827013 and it was linked to her Account with number 26620100011690 and she was receiving the subsidy in that account. But the complainant had applied for changing the consumer number in his name on 23/11/2018 and accordingly the opposite party had enrolled his Adhar number and it was duly informed to him that he will not get the subsidy benefit till 25/11/2018. At that period his gas subsidy Account status was ACTC/BCTC(Adhar Based Cash Transfer Compliant/Bank Based Cash Transfer Compliant) and it get updated with Issues 2, 3 & 4 NPCI only after linking Adhar to his account and it will take 2-3 days for that. It is as per the law and the instructions of Central Government.
The complainant without following the instructions booked the gas cylinder 23/11/2018 itself and he did not get the subsidy.The opposite party is no way responsible for that. It does not constitute any Deficiency in service / Unfair Trade Practice on their part.
This complaint is filed only for defaming the goodwill of the opposite party and for unjust enrichment and it is liable to be dismissed with cost to the opposite party.
4. Complainant filed chief affidavit in Evidence. Opposite party filed IA.274/2019 seeking permission to cross examine the complainant and it was allowed. After 28/02/2020, there was no representation from the part of the complainant and his evidence is closed. The opposite party also filed affidavit and no documents produced from their part. Heard and taken for orders.
5. Main points to be considered.
1. Whether the complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties?
2. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
3. Whether the company is entitled to the reliefs claimed?
4.Reliefs if any as cost and compensation.
6. Points 1
The opposite party’s contention is that the complainant has only arrayed the distributor as the opposite party in the complaint. The benefits has to be issued to the subscriber by the Central Government and the Bharat Gas Agency. They are necessary parties to the complaint and without whom the proper adjudication of the complaint is not possible and so it is bad for non- joinder of necessary parties.
From the pleadings in the complaint, the complainant’s grievance is that the opposite party has not informed him about the technicalities of availing subsidy and the complaint is filed claiming compensation for the deficiency in service on their part. Hence there is no necessity of adding the Central Govt and Bharat Gas Agency in the party array. The issue is decided accordingly.
7. Points 2, 3 & 4
The complainant’s grievance is that he approached the opposite party for getting a gas connection and submitted the application along with Adhar card, Bank passbook and other required documents on 23/11/2018. He got connection with consumer number 33388 and he booked cylinder on the same day and got it on 28/11/2018 on payment of Rs.967/- . But the subsidy amount was not credited to his bank account even after the lapse of one month.
8. The opposite party contended that originally the gas connection with consumer number 33388 belonged to one Ms. Sajitha.S and her Bank account was linked with Adhar and she was getting subsidy in that account. The complainant had given application for transferring the connection in his name on 23/11/2018 and the opposite party had initiated the necessary actions for enrolling his Adhar number. They have duly communicated to the complainant that it will take 2-3 days and he will get the subsidy only after 25/11/2018. But he booked the gas cylinder on 23/11/2018 itself. During that period his account status is ACTC/BCTC(Adhar Based Cash Transfer Compliant/Bank Based Cash Transfer Compliant) and only after Adhar linking it will get updated with NPCI and then only he will be entitled to the benefits.
9. In this connection it is pertinent to note that in the case of ‘Name change’ in gas connection, Adhar has to be linked with the new Account for getting the subsidy benefits.
Govt has by various modes communicated to the public and given publicity for the need for linking Adhar with gas connection for getting the subsidy. In normal course it takes 2-3 days for the process of linking. The complainant’s grievance is that he was not informed by the opposite parties that it will take 2-3 days for linking the Adhar with the bank Account and he booked the gas cylinder on the same day when he got connection. Later on he was informed by the opposite parties that he is not entitled to get subsidy as his account was not linked to Adhar on the day when he booked the cylinder.
10. As stated earlier, the opposite parties contended that they had duly communicated this matter to the complainant and he booked the cylinder without adhering to the rules prescribed by the Govt in this connection and the opposite party’s advice.
11. The complainant has not adduced any evidence to substantiate his pleading that the opposite party was bound by law to inform the complainant as to the technicalities of availing the subsidy. The complainant did not take any steps to cross examine the opposite party to bring out the veracity of his contention.
12. From the facts and circumstances of the case, it is seen that the opposite party has provided their service within time. Further they have not made any unlawful gains.
13. Hence we hold that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
In the result the complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 16th day of May, 2022.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President
Sd/-
Vidya.A
Member
Sd/-
Krishnankutty.N.K
Member
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Nil
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Nil
Witness examined from complainant’s side:-
NIL
Witness examined from opposite party’s side:-
NIL
Cost: Nil
