By R. VIJAYAKUMAR, MEMBER.

            The complaint is filed for the refund of security deposit amount Rs.5,720 each with interest at the rate of 12%, excess charges collected for refill, Rs.500 each for deficiency in service, 200 each for mental agony and 300 for incidental charges. 

            The avernments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows.

            The complainant purchased Neethi Gas from the II opposite party’s out let, which was distributed by II opposite party and supplied by I opposite party. When the other Oil companies charging Rs.301 for the refill of 14 Kg Cylinder Neethi Gas was charging Rs.400 for refilling 12 Kg till December 2006.  From the date onwards Neethi Gas increased the refill charges for 12 Kg to Rs.500/-.  The complainant discontinued the purchase of Neethi Gas and demanded to II opposite party for the refund of caution deposit.  2 Nos of empty Cylinder was in possession of the I Complainant and II Complainant returned the empty Cylinder.  Even though both the consumers requested for the refund of   caution deposit II opposite party informed them that the deposit amount could not be returned without sanction from their higher authorities.  Hence the compliant is filed for redressel.

            Opposite parties filed separate version.  The I opposite party contented that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts stated in their version that Consumer fed, with the consent of Government ventured in the cooking gas segment to tide over the crisis to the maximum possible in the interest of public of Kerala.  As Consumerfed is not a public company dealing with petroleum products, it had to depend upon private companies for buying bulk petroleum gas.  Hence Consumerfed entered into a contract with Shri. Shakti LPG Ltd for supply of filled cooking Gas.  The subsidy allowed by the Govt. of India to the public sector companies, but it was denied to private companies.  As a result Consumerfed could not sell cooking gas at the price rate for which public sector companies were selling Cooking Gas.   Because of this reason Shri. Shakthi LPG Ltd which is a private company backed out from supplying of filled Cylinder. An arbitration case was filed by consumerfed against Shri. Shakthi Gas Agency.  Out of Rs.5,750/- received from Customers Rs.5,500/- was given to Shri Shakthi LPG Ltd and Rs. 100/- to Primary Societies and Consumerfed appropriated Rs.150/- only.  The Consumerfed was forced to open a plant, had to puchase new Cylinders and regulators without collecting any amount from the Customers, sustaining loss of many crores of rupees.  Price of bulk gas got increased and at present Consumerfed spends Rs.528/- per every Cylinder and delivers to Consumer at the rate of Rs400/- suffering loss of Rs.128/- per one Cylinder. 

            The contention of the complainant that opposite party had collected Rs.5,750/- as deposit of LP Gas connection is not correct.  It was collected as connection fee and opposite party has never agreed to return the connection fee.

            In fact Forum should penalize M/s. Shri. Shakthi LPG Ltd.  The cooking Gas connection documents were issued in their name and style only and hence they only should be asked to refund.  If at all refund is essential it may be only proportional.

II opposite party filed version stating that II opposite party distributing the cooking gas as per the direction of I opposite party.  The I opposite party is the authority of fixing the price of Neethi Gas.   As per their guidelines, the party who does not want to continue the connection, may return the Gas Cylinder and apply to the agency in the prescribed format and sent it to the I opposite party.  After getting confirmation from the I opposite party, they will take the Cylinders and Regulator from the agency and refund the caution deposit.  In this case II complainant returned the gas cylinders on 27.04.07 for filling purpose.  But never applied before the II opposite party as an agent in the prescribed format.  No information regarding termination has given to the I opposite party.  There is no deficiency on the part of I opposite party.

            The complainant filed replication and affidavit.  No evidence adduced by opposite party 1 and 2.  Based on the contention the points that would arise for consideration are;

1.      Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.

2.      Reliefs and cost.    

Points (1) and (2)

           The difficulties facing by the I opposite party in the trade of cooking gas is not a matter concerned with the complainants.  As the complainants stated in their replication arbitration proceedings between I opposite party and Shri Shakthi  LPG LTD has no  Locus Standi  in this case.  Shri. Shakti LPG LTD is not a party in this case.

           The contention of I opposite party that the amount Rs.5,750/- received from the customers was connection fee and it is not refundable.  No evidence submitted by the I opposite party to prove that the amount received was towards connection charges.  The complainant is eligible to get the Caution Deposit.  The Complainant in cross-examination stated that they have applied for refund of caution deposit.  But on perusal of documents we find that they have not applied for getting back the caution deposit before lodging this complaint.  But subsequently they submitted application before the II opposite party.  Even then opposite parties have not taken any steps to return back the caution deposit.

           On a detailed verification of complaint, affidavit and documents submitted we find that there is deficiency in service on the part of I opposite party.

           Hence the complaint is allowed.  The I opposite party is directed to pay Rs.5,750/- each to the complainant’s after receiving 2 Cylinder  from the complainant I.  As service was rendered by opposite parties and the application for repayment was subsequent to this complaint, interest shall not be paid.  The I opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.500/- as cost.  As an agent, II opposite party can act only under the instructions of I opposite party and there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.  Hence the II opposite party is exhonourated.

           The order is to be complied with within one month of the date of receipt of this order.

Dated this the 28^th  day of November, 2008

INDEX

List of witness for the complaint

PW1   : Jose Joy

Ext. P1:Pass Book