DOF 14.12.09

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR

Present: Sri.K.Gopalan:  President

Smt.K.P.Prethakumari:  Member

Smt.M.D.Jessy:               Member

                                                  Dated this, the 30^th   day of April  2010

C.C.No.326/2009

P.K.Shaji,

Ezhome Amsom Desom,

Nr.Siva Skshethram

Kannom.                                                                     Complainant

1. Managing Director,

    Kerala State Co.op.Consumer Federation,                   opposite parties

    Gandhi Nagar, Kochi.

2. Secretary,

   Ezhome Service co.op.Bank,

   P.O. Ezhome.

          O R D E R

Sri.K.Gopalan, President

            This is a complaint filed under section12 of the consumer protection Act for getting an order directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.5750/- with compensation and cost.

            The case of the complainant is that he has availed cooking gas connection from the 2nd opposite party, bank in the year 1995. The distribution of gas connection is a joint effort of all the opposite parties. Complainant paid an amount of Rs.5750/- at the time of taking the connection. Opposite parties are liable to return the amount at the time of surrendering the equipments inconsequence of disconnection as assured by 2^nd  opposite party. Since the gas distribution happened to be irregular and high increase in price complainant surrendered the equipments and requested to refund the amount. Opposite parties did not refund the amount even after the surrender of cylinders and regulator. Hence this complaint.

            After receiving the complaint, Forum sent notice to both sides. But  1^st Opposite parties sent version through post but they did not appear before this Forum.

1^st  opposite party consumer Fed filed version contending that it is not correct to say that Rs.500/- paid by complainant as registration fee and the balance Rs.5250/- as security deposit. In fact the whole amount of Rs.5750/- was only connection fee. Therefore the claim for refund of the amount in pretext of security deposit is baseless.

2^nd opposite party filed no version

            On the above pleadings the following issues have been taken for consideration. 

1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of the opposite parties?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the remedy as prayed in the complaint?

3. Relief and cost.

The evidence consists of oral testimony of complainant as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A3 marked on the side of the complainant. Opposite party has neither oral evidence nor documentary evidence.

Issue Nos. 1 to 3

            Complainant availed gas connection from opposite parties on payment of Rs.5750/-. Ext.A1 is the authorization letter, A2 is the letter sent by 1^st opposite party to 2^nd opposite party that shows  they have received an amount of Rs.5750/- and also received back the cylinders and regulator when the cooking gas connection  disconnected.  The evidence  adduced by the complainant proves that opposite parties  failed to distribute the cooking gas regularly. When the complainant, consumer was complained, 2^nd opposite party expressed his inability and explained that it is the consumer fed is responsible for the supply of gas and 2^nd  opposite party is  only distribute it to the consumers.  Consumer fed contended that distribution became irregular only because the Koldy Petroleum India Ltd. abruptly stopped the supply. The available evidence on record shows that the distribution of gas became irregular, whatever maybe the problem existed in between the opposite parties. If gas is not available regularly   that will naturally affect the daily life of the family. It is quite clear that in the present case that the cooking gas distribution became irregular gradually and there by suffered by the complainant and his family. So we have no hesitation to hold that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties, the complainant is entitled to get the amount refunded, which the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay. The issue Nos. 1 to 3 partly found in favour of complainant.

            In the result, complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to refund Rs.5750/-(Rupees Five thousand Seven hundred and fifty only) to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is allowed to execute the order against the opposite parties under the provisions of consumer protection Act.

                                    Sd/-                 Sd/-                               Sd/- 

                             President                 Member                       Member

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the complainant

A1.Authorisatin letter

A2. Copy of the letter dt.67.04 sent by OP1 to OP2.

 A3.Receipt dt8.12.09 issued by OP

Exhibits for the opposite parties: Nil                              /forwarded by order/

Witness examined for the complainant

PW1.Karunakaran

Witness examined for opposite parties: Nil                    Senior superintendent

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur