DOF.12.5.2010 DOO.4.10.2010 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 4th day of October 2010 C.C.No.137/2010 K.Subhash Babu, Koroth House, Kottam, P.O.Mundalur. Complainant 1. Secretary, Mavilayi Service co.op.Bank, P.O.Mavilayi 2. Managing Director, Kerala State Co.op.Consumer Federation, Opposite parties Gandhi Nagar, Kochi. 3.Manager, Koldy Petrtoleum India, Moongilmada,Vannamada, Kozhinhampara,Palakkad. O R D E R Smt. K.P.Preethakumari, Member 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 Rs.10, 000/- as compensation. The case of the complainant is that his mother Janaki had availed cooking gas connection from opposite party on 23.4.08 by giving Rs.5750/- to 1st opposite party as security with a condition that the amount will be refunded to the complainant at the time of surrendering the gas connection. The opposite parties 2 and 3 were supplying the gas as a joint venture. The complainant’s mother was expired on 1.7.03 and the complainant is her only legal heir. The service of the 1st opposite party was irregular and quality and quantity of the gas supplied was substandard. So the complainant had surrendered the gas connection to the 1st opposite party. The complainant send a letter to 1st opposite party on 22.1.2010 requesting to refund the deposited amount. Even though they received the notice, the 1st opposite party neither replied nor returned the deposited amount. So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. Hence this complaint. Upon receiving the complaint Forum had issued notices to all opposite parties. Even though all of them received notice they have not entered appearance. But opposite parties 2 and 3 have filed version with the following contentions. 2nd opposite party filed version admitting that they had already received Rs.5750/- through 1st opposite party from the complainant and out of this amount Rs.5500/- was given to 3rd opposite party, Rs.100/- to 1st opposite party and Rs.150/- was appropriated by them selves. The delay in supplying the gas was caused due to the withdrawal of 3rd opposite party from the agreement for supplying gas and hence there is no deficiency of service on the part of 2nd opposite party and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 3rd opposite party field version submitting that they have no liability to refund any amount to the complainant since there is no agreement between complainant and 3rd opposite party to that effect and the agreement is with 2nd opposite party and hence 2nd opposite party is liable to refund. So there is no deficiency of service on the part of 3rd opposite party and hence the complaint against 3rd opposite party is liable to be dismissed. Upon the above contentions the main points to be decided in this case is whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. The evidence in this case consists of the chief affidavit filed by the complainant in lieu of chief examination and Exts.A1 to A7. The complainant’s case is that his mother had availed gas connection from opposite parties and due to substandard quality and quantity of the gas supplied he had surrendered the gas connection and request for refund. But opposite parties were not refunded the amount. In order to prove his case he has produced Ext.A1 to A7 such as letter issued by 1st opposite party, receipt for advance amount, copy of surrendering letter, surrendering certificate, receipt for Rs.5750/-, death certificate and legal heir ship certificate. The admission of 2nd opposite party along with ExtA1 to A4 proves the case of the complainant that he had availed gas connection after paying Rs.5750/- to the 1st opposite party. Ext.A5 is the surrendering certificate which shows that the complainant had surrendered both cylinders and regulator to 1st opposite party on 22.1.10. Ext.A6 is the death certificate and A7 is the legal heir ship certificate which shows that the complainant is the only legal heir of the deceased Janaki. So from the above discussion it is seen that the opposite parties were failed to supply gas within time and hence we are of the opinion that there is deficiency of service on the part of all opposite parties since all of them were used to supply gas as a joint venture. There is no contra evidence before us. So all the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to refund the amount of Rs.5750/- to the complainant and the complainant is entitled to receive the amount as he is the only one legal heir of the deceased Janaki 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/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1. Letter issued by 1st opposite party A2. Receipt for advance amount A3. Copy of surrendering letter A5.Receipt for Rs.5750/-, A5. Surrendering certificate, A6. Copy of the death certificate A7. Copy of legal heir ship certificate. Exhibits for the opposite parties: Nil Witness examined for either side: Nil /forwarded by order/ Senior superintendent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur
| | [HONORABLE PREETHAKUMARI.K.P] Member[HONORABLE MR. GOPALAN.K] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE JESSY.M.D] Member | | 
