Kerala

Kollam

CC/06/31

Raman Pillai,Gokulathil Veedu,Neeravil and others - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Managing Director,Shri Sakthi LPG Ltd,andother - Opp.Party(s)

B.Krishnakumar

11 Dec 2007

ORDER


KOLLAM
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
consumer case(CC) No. CC/06/31

Raman Pillai,Gokulathil Veedu,Neeravil and others
Abdul Majeed,Cheukunnath Kizhakkathil,Neeravil,Prinadu.P.O,Kollam
Augustian,Ipuzha Bhavan,NeeravilPerinaduP.O,Kollam
B.Sumathikutty,Kalyani mandiram,Neeravil,Perinadu.P.O,Kollam
Balakrishna Pillai.G,Bigili Bhavan,Neeravil,Perinadu.P.O,Kollam
Vijayamma.P,Vigi Babu Cottage,Neeravil,Perinadu.P.O,Kollam
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

The Managing Director,Shri Sakthi LPG Ltd,andother
Chairman,Kerala State Co-operative Consumer Federation ltd.,Gandhi Nagar,Ernakulam,Cochin-682020
The Secretary,Thrikkadavoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.,Neeravil,Perinad.P.O,
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. K.VIJAYAKUMARAN ACHARI 2. RAVI SUSHA

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

By ADV. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER This is a complainant filed seeking a direction to the opp.party for cancellation of LPG connection and to refund Rs.6028/- deposited by the complainant as security deposit for Neethi Gas connection. The complainant’s case can be briefly summarized as follows: The complainant is consumer Nos. 21333, 21388, 21332, 213441, 21389, 21375 of the opp.party. The complainant attracted by the offer of the opp.party that instant LPG connection will be provided for Rs.6028/- deposited the above sum and took the LPG gas connection. The payment of Rs.6028/- was made through the 2nd opp.party on various dates in 1998. The supply of the LPG refill was not at all satisfactory. There is inordinate delay in providing refills. Exorbitant charge is also levied for refills compared to the gas supplied by the other agencies. Due to the deficiency in service the complainant is not interested in continuing as a consumer of the opp.party. The complainant issued a notice requesting to cancel the LPG connection and to refund the security deposit of Rs.6028/-. But the opp.parties did not refund the amount and hence the complaint. The opp.parties are exparte. However the first opp.party has filed a version contending that there is no deficiency in service or delay . There is no deficiency in service by this opp.party and there is no consumer dispute between the complainant and this opp.party. The above complaint is not maintainable as against the opp.party before this Hon’ble Forum. This opp.party has not received any amount from the complainant at any point of time. This opp.party is not at all a necessary party in the above proceedings. Therefore the complaint may be dismissed The points that would arise for consideration are: [i] Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties. [ii] Reliefs and costs. Exts. P1 to P9 are marked. No oral evidence is adduced by the opp.parties. Points 1 and 2 As a matter of fact there is no dispute that the complainants are consumersof the opp.party. The contention of the complainant is that there is deficiency in service. There is inordinate delay in supply of refills and exorbitant price is charged for the refills. Therefore he does not want to continue as a consumer of the opp.parties. Though the first opp.party would contend in the version that there is no delay in supply of refills or deficiency in service, no evidence was adduced to establish that contentions. The opp.parties did not cross examine the complaint. Therefore, the evidence adduced by the complainant stands unimpeached. In these circumstances we are constrained to find that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.party and the complainant is entitled to get an order as prayed for. Points found accordingly. In the result the complaint is allowed, directing the opp.party to refund the security deposit of Rs.6028/- to the each complainant after canceling the LPG connection. The opp. parties are directed to pay Rs.1000/- to each complainant towards cost and compensation. The complainant will return the gas cylinders and the regulator to the opp.party on getting the refund of the security deposit. The order is to be complied with within one month from the date of receipt of the order. Dated this the 11th day of December, 2007 K.Vijayakumaran Achary :Sd/- Adv. Ravi Susha :Sd/- Forwarded/by Order, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT. I N D E X List of witnesses for the complainant PW.1. – Nil List documents for the complainant P1. –cash receipt P2. Cash receipt P3.-Connection certificate to G. Remanan Pillai P4. – Connection certificate issued by Sri Shakti LPG Ltd. to P.V. Sreenivasan P5. – Connection Certificate to the Balakrishna Pillai P6. – Connection certificate to the Abdul Majeed P7. – Connection certificate to P. Vijayamma P8. – Terms and conditions P9. – Cash receipt




......................K.VIJAYAKUMARAN ACHARI
......................RAVI SUSHA