BEFORE THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM NUH (MEWAT).
Complaint No. 17 of 2016
Date of Instt: 16.08.2016
Date of decision: 26.09.2017
Kamalddin son of Nasru, resident of village Adbar, Tehsil Nuh, District Mewat.
…..Complainant.
Versus
Vijay Gas Agency, Jogipur Road Nuh Tehsil Nuh, District Mewat, through its Proprietor.
….Opposite party
Complaint under Section 12 of
Consumer Protection Act, 1986
BEFORE:- Sh. Rajbir Singh Dahiya, PRESIDENT
Smt. Urmil Beniwal, MEMBER
Smt. Kiran Bala, MENBER
Present:- Sh. Farukh Khan, Adv. for the complainant.
Sh. Mohd. Sahun, Adv. for the opposite party.
ORDER:- (Sh. Rajbir Singh Dahiya)
The facts of the complaint in brief are that the complainant is a consumer of the opposite party vide L.P.G. gas connection No. 614607. It is alleged that the complainant visited the agency of the opposite party for booking the gas cylinder, but the opposite party intentionally cancelled the booked cylinder without any reason and lastly refused to book the gas cylinder. It is further alleged that the officials of the opposite party committed the black marketing of the gas cylinder by selling in the market to the taxi drivers. A legal notice dated 12/14.07.2016 was sent to the opposite party with request to supply the gas cylinder in time without delay, but the opposite party did not give any reply of the said notice. Hence, the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and the opposite party be directed to book the gas cylinder of the complainant and to supply filled gas cylinder in time without delay as well as to pay compensation of Rs. 5,00000/- to the complainant for mental agony and tension.
2. On notice, the opposite party put in appearance and filed written statement by agitating that the complaint is not maintainable and the complaint is false and concocted and has been filed only to harass the answering opposite party. It has been contended that the opposite party did not cancel the complainant’s booked cylinder intentionally, rather there are many reasons for cancellation of cylinders i.e. non-availability of the pass book, non-availability of the empty cylinder at the time of delivery and non-availability of the consumer at his house at the time of supply or even denial by the consumer to take cylinder from the supplier. The opposite party has refused involvement of the officials of the opposite party from the black marketing of the gas cylinder. All the allegations leveled by the complainant on the opposite party are totally wrong. Dismissal of complaint is prayed for.
3. In evidence, the complainant has produced his own affidavit EX. CW1/A and copy of cylinder booking history Ex. C1 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, opposite party has not produced any evidence and has made the statement that the written statement already filed by him be read in evidence and closed the evidence.
4. We have gone through the documents placed on file by both the parties. The complainant also annexed photocopy of consumer record book with his complaint issued by the opposite party. Though, it is not exhibited but the same is signed by the complainant as ‘Kamal’ which signature he has initialed on his complaint as well as his affidavit. After going through the evidence of the complaint and the reply of the opposite party, we have to address this consumer record book/pass book as well as computer generated record Ex. C1. The backside of the consumer record book shows in English three words “Return as Cancelled” against booking on 02.01.2016, 05.01.2016 and 09.01.2016. All other refills have been delivered to the complainant regularly under the signatures of the delivery-man namely Nisar, Shammer and Naffes. All the delivery-men have entered all the particulars in Hindi and also signed in Hindi. The word cancelled on 02.01.2016, 05.01.2016 and 09.01.2016 are written in English and are not initialed by the delivery man. Ex. C1 does not show these cancellations at all. It is pertinent to mention that all three cancellations are within a gap of three or four days, which is not probable. Another allegation leveled by the complainant pertains to selling the cylinders in black by the opposite party finds no support from any document or proof. Mere alleging something without probable and cogent proof cannot hold the ground pertaining to the allegations.
5. On the contrary the opposite party has categorically stated that the gas booking for the last two-three years is done directly with the central booking system/portal of the Gas Company of which telephone number is provided to every consumer and that booking if is in order, then the central booking system directs the concerned gas dealer to generate a bill/invoice the number and detail of which are intimated to the central agency who duly informed the consumer through the massage regarding the expected date of delivery. The opposite party has no role either in booking or in cancelling the same except when the delivery man goes on the spot either non- availability of consumer record book/pass book, empty cylinder and either denial or non-availability of the consumer, otherwise accepting the booking direction to the dealer for delivery of refill or cancellation are the sole authority of the central booking agency. The opposite party has no role except mentioned above in this matter. It shall not be out of way to mention here that all types of complaint of the consumer are entertained by the central booking system of the gas company and it is that agency which addresses them and redress every kind of grievance of the consumer.
6. In this case the complainant did not take trouble to address his grievance to the central booking agency managed by Hindustan Petroliam Corporation Limited of which the opposite party is a dealer. In view of the above discussion made above, we are of the considered opinion that this complaint has no merit and the same is hereby dismissed. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced on 26.09.2017
President
Member Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum/Nuh (Mewat)
26.09.2017
