Kerala

Kannur

CC/17/2013

AK Sainaba, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Secretary, Kappad Service Co-op Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

28 May 2013

ORDER

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,KANNUR
 
Complaint Case No. CC/17/2013
 
1. AK Sainaba,
Nadira Manzil, Chelora, PO Kappad, 670006
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE MR. GOPALAN.K PRESIDENT
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

DOF.14-01-2013

DOO.28-05-2013

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR

 

Present: Sri.K.Gopalan:  President

 

                            Dated this, the 28th  day of  May 2013

 

C.C.No.17 /2013

A.K.Sainabha,

Nadira Manzil,

Chelora, P.O.Kappad                                              Complainant

(Rep. by Adv..P.Vinayaraj)

 

1.  Secretary,

     Kappad  Service co.op.Bank,

     P.O.Kappad.

 2. Managing Director,

     Kerala State Co.op.Consumer Federation,               Opposite parties

     Gandhi Nagar, Kochi.

3.  Koldy Petroleum India Ltd.

     Moongilamada,

     Vannamada, Kozhinhampara, Palakkad.

 

          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 interest and cost

The case of the complainant in brief is as follows: The complainant has taken cooking gas connection in the year 1999 from the opposite parties through the Neethi Store. At the time of taking the connection he has paid  Rs.5750. 1st opposite party/Bank promised the complainant to refund the same at the time when the connection happened to be surrendered. The cooking gas  distribution  by the opposite parties  later on became irregular and the quality also deteriorated, when it was complained to 1st opposite party they answered that it is opposite parties 2 and 3 are responsible for the same. Because of these reasons complainant surrendered the connection demanding to refund the amount of 5750. But the amount was not refunded by them. Hence this complaint.

Pursuant to the notice opposite parties 2 and 3  sent their version but did not made appearance.

The version of opposite parties 2 and 3 admitted the facts but blamed each other for the faults happened to be taken place resulting in the stoppage of distribution of cooking gas.

2nd opposite party/Consumer fed has also explained  the  social activities and their services to the consumers during the  last several years  as they were dealing with the distribution of domestic goods and prayed considering those aspect  to  dismiss the case against  them penalizing  3rd  opposite party Koldy Petroleum who allegedly stopped supply of cookinggas abruptly.

          3rd opposite party Koldy Petroleum on the other hand  contended that they are not liable to refund any amount to the complainant in the absence of any contract to  that effect.

          Complainant adduced evidence by way of affidavit evidence and marked Ext.A1 and A2.

          The main issue to be considered is whether thee is any deficiency in service on the side of opposite parties.

          The evidence adduced by complainant including Ext.A1 receipt issued by the Kappad Service co-op bank/ 1st opposite party and Ext.A2 issue as the receipt receiving the cylinders and regulator goes to show that the complaint has deposited   Rs.5750 at the time of taking cooking gas connection and he had surrendered two cylinders and one regulator at the time of surrendering the connection. It is the admitted fact that complainant paid the amount. Opposite parties have no case that the amount is refunded, The available evidence makes it certain that the distribution of coking gas was stopped and complainant has no other way except surrendering the same. Hence it is evident that there is deficiency in service in the joint venture of the opposite parties. The opposite parties are liable to refund the amount of Rs.5750 deposited by the complainant. No cost is ordered considering the  peculiar situation and thus the issue is answered partly in favour of the complainant and order passed accordingly.

          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/-                  President 

 

 

 

 

                    

 

                             

                                             APPENDIX

Exhibits for the complainant

A1& A2.Certificates dated  24.12.12 issued by OP 

 

Exhibits for the opposite parties: Nil

 

Witness examined for either side: Nil

 

                                                                /forwarded by order/

 

 

 

                                                                   Senior Superintendent                                               

 

 

         

 
 
[HONORABLE MR. GOPALAN.K]
PRESIDENT

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.