D.o.F:4/4/08<br /> D.o.O:8/9/08<br /> IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KASARAGOD<br /> CC.NO.43/2008 <br /> Dated this, the 8th day of September 2008<br /> <br /> PRESENT:<br /> SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT<br /> SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER<br /> SMT.P.P.SYAMALADEVI : MEMBER<br /> <br /> Abdul Majeed,<br /> S/o T.P.Abdulla,<br /> R/at Fathima Villa, : Complainant<br /> Orimukku, <br /> Kaithakkad Po. Cheruvathur <br /> <br /> The Proprietor,<br /> Cheruvathur Petrolieum Agency, : Opposite party<br /> H.P.Dealer,Matlayi,Cheruvathur.<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ: PRESIDENT<br /> Complaint bereft of unnecessaries is that, the complainant Abdul Majeed took his Maruti Swift car bearing Reg.No.KL-14/F 4949 to the fueling station of the opposite party Cheruvathur Petroleum Agency and requested to fill petrol worth Rs.500/-. The opposite party’s worker filled fuel in the car. Thereafter, the vehicle stopped on the way and later the vehicle was taken to authorized service station by towing. On inspection it was found that instead of petrol the vehicle was filled with diesel and that was the reason for its damage. He had incurred a sum of Rs.5500/- as repairing charges, Rs.2000/- is spent for towing the car to the authorised service center and Rs.1000/- for fueling the car. Apart from this, its resale value is decreased. Hence the complaint claiming Rs.30,000/- from opposite party on various heads.<br /> <br /> 2. Opposite party, the Proprietor , Cheruvathur Petroleum Agency entered appearance and filed his version. According to him, he did not know whether Abdul Majeed came to his petrol bunk and filled his car with petrol. He denies that the vehicle is filled with diesel instead of petrol as fuel. The petrol is sold on 24/11/07 and issued cash memo to the purchaser. The vehicle may stop in the way may be due to mechanical defects and there is no certificate from any qualified personnel to show that the vehicle is stopped due to the filling of diesel. Complainant did not inform opposite party regarding the stopping of the vehicle on the way on 24/11/07 either directly or over phone. The complainant informed first time only through a registered lawyer notice dated 6/12/07. As per the complaint Abdul Majeed came to know the reason for stopping the vehicle on 26/11/07 itself and he took 10 days to approach an advocate to cause a lawyer notice. Moreover, the complainant took his vehicle to Kannur for repair and opposite party was not informed about this. According to opposite party, Abdul Majeed is an instrumental to some unruly elements whose agenda is to tarnish opposite party in his business. There is no negligence on his side and he is not liable to pay anything to complainant. The complaint is an experimental one and for tarnishing the opposite party. Hence the complaint deserves a dismissal.<br /> <br /> 3. The complainant filed an affidavit reiterating what is stated in his complaint and Exts.A1 to A5 marked. Opposite party filed counter affidavit and no documents produced on his side. Both sides heard and documents scrutinized carefully.<br /> <br /> 4. Ext.A1 is the cash memo dated 24/11/07 issued from Cheruvathur Petroleum agency to vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-14F/4949 in which as against the particulars shown in the bill against diesel 10.85 lr. is seen written and scored off. Then against petrol 10.85 lr. is shown with a rate of Rs. 46.75. Thus a sum of Rs.500/- is collected. The bill itself proves that the worker of opposite party who filled the fuel was confused and even then he collected the rate of petrol from the complainant for the diesel filled in it. Exts.A2 &A3 are the bills dtd.26/11/2007 issued from Popular Vehicles and services Ltd to Abdul Majeed for repairing the vehicle. On the overleaf of Exts.A2&A3, the supervisor of Popular Vehicles and Services Ltd. had endorsed that the Maruti Swift car bearing Reg.No.KL-14F-4949 was filled with diesel instead of petrol while it was brought for repair to them. As per Exts.A2 a sum of Rs.3156.79 and as per Ext.A3 ,Rs.1915.18 are seen charged from the complainant. <br /> <br /> 5. Opposite party filed counter affidavit in support of his contentions made in his version. The opposite party mainly contents that Abdul Majeed was an instrumental in the hands of some unruly elements and their intention was to tarnish his reputation. Inspite of this bald allegation he has not produced anything to support this contention. Hence this contention is not behavable. The opposite party further contents that the complainant has not caused any damages on account of filling fuel from the petrol bunk belongs to him. According to him, Exts.A2&A3 are managed by the complainant. This averment is also not correct. If opposite party has got any doubt regarding the veracity of Exts A2&A3, then he could have taken steps to examine the executor of Exts.A2&A3. He was also at liberty to proceed legally against those who issued Exts.A2&A3 if those are concocted documents. But no steps were initiated by opposite party against them. All this would got to prove that opposite party have no consistent defense to put. The opposite party submits that he had served petrol to the complainant on 24/11/07 and issued Ext.A1. But Ext.A1 itself casts doubt due to the corrections in the bill. Opposite party has no case that the complainant committed any forgery in the said bill. Soon after filling the fuel, the car of Abdul Majeed became damaged and the series of events happened further like stopping the car on the way, its towing to authorized service center , its repair etc.<br /> <br /> 6. From the facts ,circumstances and the evidence adduced, we are satisfied that the opposite party, the Proprietor, M/s Cheruvathur Petroleum Agency has committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by filling the Maruti Swift car of Abdul Majeed with diesel instead of petrol and collecting the price of petrol instead of the price of diesel. Hence he is liable to compensate the complainant for the loss, hardships and mental agony sustained to him.<br /> <br /> 7. Reliefs&Costs:<br /> <br /> Abdul Majeed had incurred a sum of Rs.3156.79 +1915.18=5071.97 as per Exts.A2&A3 for repairing the vehicle. In addition to this, he incurred Rs.2000/- towards towing charges for taking the vehicle to the authorized service center at Kannur. He also spent Rs.1000/- for filling the vehicle with petrol.<br /> In addition to this amount actually incurred Abdul Majeed also entitled for compensation for the loss and hardships he suffered. We award a sum of Rs.5000/- towards this count. <br /> Therefore, the complaint is allowed and the Proprietor, Cheruvathur Petroleum Agency hereby directed to pay Rs.13071/- (rounded to Rs.13,000/-) to Abdul Majeed along with a cost of Rs.2000/-. Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.<br /> Sd/ Sd/ Sd/<br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> Exts:<br /> A1-dt.24/11/07-bill of Rs.500/-<br /> A2-dt.27/11/07- bill issued by Popular Vehicles & Services Ltd, kannur.<br /> A3—do-<br /> A4-dt.6/12/07-lawyer notice<br /> A5-dt.24/12/07 reply notice<br /> Sd/ Sd/ Sd/<br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> eva/ <br /> /Forwarded by Order/<br /> <br /> SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT<br />