DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 12^th day of December 2018

Present  : Smt.Shiny.P.R,  President

                : Smt.Suma.K.P, Member

                : Sri. V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member                                 Date of Filing: 16/08/2017

CC No.122/2017

Susheela Ramachandran,

“Lakshmisree”, 5/266(7)

Durga Lane, Puthur,

Palakkad – 678 001.

(By Person only)                                                                                                               -              Complainant

V/s

1. Zonal Area Manager,

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,

Kozhikode Area Office,

IIIrd Floor, P.M.K.Towers,

Civil Station Post, Wayanad Road,

Kozhikode – 673 020.

(By Advs.Domenic Antony, Keshavaraj Nair, Joson & P.Anil)

2. Manager,

Yemkay Gas Agencies,

Koppam, Puthur Road,

Palakkad – 678 001.

3. Manager,

Central Bank of India,

Palakkad Branch,

T.B.Road, Palakkad – 678 014.

(By Adv.P.K.Devadas)

4. Represented by Manager,

NPCI Bombay,C-9, 8^th Floor,

RBI premises Bardra krung

Bardra East, Mumbai City Distr.

Maharashtra – 400 051.

5. NPCI Chennai, -Opposite parties

47 & 49 Bazullah Road,

T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017.

(Represented by Manager)

O R D E R

By Smt.Suma.K.P, Member

Brief facts of complaint:

The case of the complainant is that she is a consumer of IOC Indane Gas Agency, Koppam, Puthur Road and has account with Central Bank of India.  From 2015 April upto March 2016 she has received the subsidy for the consumption of cooking gas.  But from April 2016 to June 2017 the subsidy was not credited due to Aadhar Link failure in the bank account as per gas agency’s record.   But in the gas delivery bill it is shown that the subsidy will be transferred to her Aadhar linked account.  Since the amount was credited she contacted at Kozhikode IOC Limited and they replied that it is due to Aadhar link failure.  The complainant submits that it is a deficiency in service from the part of the opposite parties.  Hence she opened a new account with SBI, Sekharipuram Branch on 11/05/2017, and under Right to Information Act she submitted an appeal to District Collector, Palakkad for which a reply was received stating that the gas agency and the Area Manager, IOC Limited will reply to her RTI appeal.  Gas agency replied that it is not their fault but it is the consumer’s fault for not getting the Aadhar linked and agency will not liable to do anything which the subsidy demands.  Hence she has approached before this Forum stating that the concerned authorities to reimburse the subsidy from April 2016 to June 2017 and also to grant compensation with interest for the mental agony and pain and suffering and also for the expenses occurred for running from pillar to post. Hence this complaint.

Notice was issued to the opposite parties for appearance.  1^st Opposite party entered appearance and filed version contending the following.  On verifying the details of the complainant, it was found that the Aadhar of the complainant had become inactive at the bank, 3^rd opposite party.  The same was inactive during April 2016 during which the subsidy has not been credited.  This was because of the problem with Aadhar linking from the part of the 3^rd opposite party.  On 22/06/2017, the complainant’s Aadhar had got linked to her SBT account.  The scheme opted for the complainant was that of DSCDBTL.  In the said scheme, the LPG ID is linked with both Aadhar and the bank.  The bank to which the said scheme was registered to was the 3^rd opposite party.  Since the Aadhar was finally linked to the SBI account, the complainant’s scheme was transferred to her SBI account.  The subsidy against the last refill delivered on 18/07/2017 got credited to the bank account on 21/07/2017.  It was also submitted that the subsidy was being credited till February 2016 and the scheme opted by the complainant was DSCDBTL.  The problems pertaining to the linking of Aadhar was from the part of the 3^rd opposite party.  The Aadhar linking with the 1^st opposite party had any issues, then the subsidy would not have processed during the previous period.  It was submitted that there is no deficiency in service, unfair trade practice or negligence from the part of the opposite party. The Complainant is not entitled to get any reliefs sought for in the complaint against 1^st opposite party and the complaint is liable be dismissed with compensatory cost to 1^st opposite party.

Opposite party 2 remained absent inspite of accepting notice from the Forum.  Hence they were called absent and set exparte.  Opposite party 3 entered appearance and filed version stating the following.  3^rd opposite party admits that the complainant was an account holder with them and a former employee too.  They also admit that the Aadhar of the complainant was linked with the bank and she was getting subsidy regularly till March 2016.  After that from April 2016 to June 2017 the complainant’s bank account was facing Aadhar delinking problem.  Even though the Aadhar link with opposite party 3 was properly linked, maintained and acting it can be seen from the Aadhar link status report that the Aadhar bank link was getting delinked the same day itself.  Howsoever they tried to link it, but it gets delink.  This phenomenal was not handy work of Opposite party 3.  Opposite party 3 is helpless and the complainant should proceed against the real wrong doers.  The bank will never meddle with the Aadhar linking of his customers especially its own former employee.   If the complainant is not getting the cooking gas subsidy it means that the amount is still in the hands of the other opposite parties to whom she has paid the cost of the cooking gas, and they are the person to pay the compensation claimed by the complainant.  The complainant was also well aware that even though the bank is linking the Aadhar it is automatically getting delink.  The complainant has to further probe into the matter and find the root cause of this problem which the complainant has not come up till now.  The complainant had already opened an account with SBT, Sekharipuram branch on 11/05/2017 and linked the Aadhar through that account.  When the new Aadhar linkage request is given the most recent request received by the NPCI(National Payment Corporation of India-Agency holding the Aadhar to bank mapping for enabling cash transfer) for linking the bank account will receive the subsidy transfers and the old linkage would automatically will cancel at NPCI.  From this date the linkage with Opposite party 3 automatically gets canceled.  This NPCI is not a party to this complaint.  They are also necessary party to this proceeding. As such this complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary parties.  There is no deficiency of service on the part of the 3^rd opposite party and the 3^rd opposite party is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant for any agony, tension, pain and expenses incurred to if any. 

Complainant filed chief affidavit along with documents.  Opposite parties 1 & 3 also filed their respective chief affidavits.  3^rd opposite party filed application seeking permission to cross examine complainant.  Since complainant had no objection, application was allowed.  Complainant was cross examined as PW1.  Exts.A1 to A8 were marked from the part of the complainant.   Ext.B1 was marked from the side of opposite parties. 

Complainant filed application as IA 114/18 to implead NPCI, Bombay and Chennai as supplemental Opposite parties 4 and 5 and for consequential amendment.  Opposite party 3 had no objection.  Hence IA was allowed and complaint was amended accordingly.  Notice was issued to supplemental opposite parties 4 and 5 for appearance.  Both supplemental 4 & 5 opposite parties remained absent inspite of accepting notice from the Forum.  Hence they were called absent and set exparte.

Hence Evidence was closed and matter was heard.

The following issues that arise for consideration are.

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?
2. If so what is the relief and cost?

Issues 1 & 2

We have perused the documents and affidavits produced before the Forum.  The 3^rd opposite party has admitted that the Aadhar of the petitioner was linked with the bank and she was getting subsidy regularly till March 2016.  After that from April 2016 to June 2017 the complainant’s bank account was facing Aadhar delinking problem.  Even though the Aadhar was properly linked, maintained and active it can be seen from the Aadhar linked status report that the Aadhar bank link was getting delinked the same day itself.  The 3^rd opposite party has submitted that they are helpless, and the complainant should proceed against the real wrong doers. The bank will never meddle with the Aadhar linking of its customers especially its own former employee.  If the complainant is not getting the cooking gas subsidy, it means that amount is still in the hands of the opposite parties to whom she has paid the cost of the cooking gas and they are liable to pay the compensation claimed by her.  The complainant has deposed that it is not the bank which has to give her the subsidy and that she is not paying the cost of the cooking gas to the bank.  When the Aadhar linkage request was given the most recent request received by the NPCI(National Payment Corporation of India) for linking the bank account will receive the subsidy transfers and the old linkage would automatically be cancelled at NPCI.  Since the NPCI was not a party to this complaint earlier, the complainant has taken steps to implead the NPCI Chennai and Bombay as opposite parties 4 and 5 through IA No.114/18.  Inspite of accepting notice they remained absent and they were called absent and set exparte.  Hence an adverse inference can be drawn against them and they are admitting what is stated in the complaint.   Hence the complaint is allowed to that extent and we direct the supplemental opposite parties 4 and 5 to reimburse subsidy amount of Rs.1,468/-(Rupees One thousand four hundred and sixty eight only) from April 2016 to June 2017 with 6 % interest to the complainant,  within one month from the date of receipt of this order.  We also direct the supplemental opposite party 4 and 5 to pay Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) as compensation for the mental agony and the expense that occurred for her for this proceedings.  Rest of the opposite parties are exonerated from the liability.

Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which the complainant is entitled for 9% interest for the whole amount from the date of order till realization.  

Pronounced in the open court on this the 12^th day of December 2018.   

                                                                                                                                                    Sd/-                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Shiny.P.R.                                           President

                                                                                                                        Sd/-              

                                                                                                                                   Suma.K.P.

                                Member

                                        Sd/-

                 V.P.Ananthanarayanan

                                Member

Appendix

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1 - Photocopy of Aadhar of the complainant.

Ext.A2 - Copy of statement of the bank account of the complainant.

Ext.A3 - Letter received from the IOC.

Ext.A4 - Status of Aadhar linkage with bank from Yemkay Agencies.

Ext.A5 - Reply for RTI Appeal from the District Supply Office, Palakkad

Ext.A6 - Reply from the Yemkay Gas Agencies for RTI.

Ext.A7 - Photostat copies of gas consumer bill received from Yemkay Gas Agencies for gas  

  delivery.

Ext.A8- Details for feedbank No.3316240

Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties

Ext.B1 - Copy of document showing the answers and solutions for the problems in getting 

  cooking gas subsidy.

Witness examined on the side of complainant

PW1    - Susheela Ramachandran

Witness examined on the side of opposite parties

Nil

Cost :  Rs.2,000/-