Date of filing   :  16-12-2011 

                                                                            Date of order  :   21 -05-2012

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                                CC.347/2011

                         Dated this, the    21^st    day of   May  2012

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                             : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                      : MEMBER

SMT. K.G.BEENA                                        : MEMBER

Shiju.M.Thankachan,                                                            }Complainant

S/o.Thankachan, Madayatharayil House,

Parantharkavu, Kallar Village,

Po.Kolichal, Taluk.

(In Person) Hosdurg

Secretary, Panathadi Service Co-op. Bank Ltd,            } Opposite party

Poodamkallu, Rajapuram.Po, Kallar  Village,

Hosdurg Taluk

(Advs.Kumaran Nair, Kasaragod & B.Mohankumar,

Hosdurg)

                                                                        O R D E R  

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT

            In nutshell case of complainant is that opposite party committed deficiency in service in the supply of LP Gas to him and thereby he suffered.  Though he surrendered his connection his security deposit is not so far returned back.  Hence the complaint.

2.         Opposite party filed version.  According to complainant has availed connection by paying `5,750/- only and not `8,500/- and they are acting  only as Commission Agent of Neethi Gas.  Out of the amount `5,750/- received from the complainant the opposite party only received `100/- as their handling  commission and there is no deficiency in service on their part.

3.         After filing the version the counsel for opposite party filed an Interlocutory Application 156/12 to implead the Kerala State Co-operative Consumers Federation Ltd (CONSUMER FED) in the party array since complainant has not impleaded the CONSUMER FED  the supplier of the Neethi Gas as party.  But the complainant submitted that he availed gas connection from the opposite party and he made the security deposit with opposite party.  He further submitted that he had no privity of contract with  CONSUMER FED   and hence he does not want to implead them in the party array.  In the light of the above  the IA is dismissed.

4.         On the side of complainant Exts.A1 & 2 marked.  No evidence adduced by opposite party to prove their contention that they have received `100/- only a commission and the remaining amount `5,650/- is deposited with CONSUMER FED.

5.         Ext.A1 is the copy of connection certificate and Ext.A2 is the copy of application dt.22-03-2011 submitted before opposite party for the refund of security amount.  Ext.A2 also shows the endorsement of opposite party proving the surrender of two gas cylinders and one regulator by the complainant with them.

6.         The non-refund of the security deposit even after the surrender of regulator and regulator is a deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. The opposite party has not produced any document to prove that they are only commission agent and out of the amount `5,750/- they only received their commission `100/- and the balance is deposited with CONSUMER FED.  Therefore they are liable to refund the amount `5,750/- to the complainant.

            Hence the complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to refund `5,750/- to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of copy of order.  They can recover the said amount of `5,750/- from the CONSUMERFED through appropriate legal proceedings after paying the amount to the complainant.

MEMBER                                                       MEMBER                                           PRESIDENT

Exts.

A.1 Photocopy of Connection Certificate.

A2.22-3-11. Photocopy of letter sent by complainant to OP.

MEMBER                                                       MEMBER                                           PRESIDENT

Pj/