DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

BATHINDA

C.C. No. 63 of 12-02-2013

Decided on 25-06-2013

Gurjant Raj S/o Sh. Dev Raj, R/o Burj Mansa, Tehsil Phul, District Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1. Indian Oil Corporation, through its Senior Area Manager, Area Manager, Indane Area Office, Plot No. 6A, Sector 19B, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh.

2. Paramveer Gas Service, SCF 95, Rose Garden Market, Bathinda 151001, through its Manager/Proprietor

3. Paramveer Gas Service, Near Bus Stand Rampura Phul, District Bathinda (Formerly known as Sukhda Gas Service, Rampura Phul, District Bathinda), through its Manager/Proprietor

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President

Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member

Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member

For the Complainant : Sh. Harpreet Singh, counsel for the complainant.

For the opposite parties : Sh. Abhey Singla, counsel for opposite party No. 1.

Sh. Ashok Gupta, counsel for opposite party Nos. 2 & 3.

O R D E R

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT

1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that he is consumer of the opposite parties vide subscription voucher No. 6828372 dated 17-9-1997 and consumer No. S-7343 of opposite party No. 3. Upon issuance of subscription voucher (SV), the complainant was issued with Refill Book for keeping record of refills of LPG cylinder issued to him from time to time. The complainant was being issued with LPG refills by opposite party No. 3 from time to time and regularly mandatory checks were made by the officials of opposite party No. 3 to check serviceability of burner, gas pipe etc., The complainant alleged that he was issued refill from time to time by the opposite party No. 3 till 22-5-2012 and thereafter opposite party No. 3 refused to issue the refills. The complainant approached the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rampura Phul, in this regard vide application dated 1-11-2012 and notice was issued to opposite party No. 3, but they did not appear. The complainant also got served legal notice upon the opposite parties on 2-11-2012, but to no effect. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to release refill of LPG to him and pay him compensation and cost.

2. The opposite party No. 1 filed its separate written statement and took preliminary objection that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the opposite party No. 1. As per the transaction entered into between the distributor i.e. opposite party No. 2 and the corporation, the distributor shall act and shall always be deemed to have acted as principal and not as an agent or on account of the corporation. On merits, the opposite party No. 1 denied all the allegations of the complainant.

3. The opposite party No. 2 & 3 filed their joint written statement and pleaded that Sukhda Gas Agency was given to opposite party No. 2 on adhoc basis to supply the gas. Previous owner of the Sukhda Gas handed over Blaze CD to opposite party No. 2 and when the said CD was displayed, the name of complainant was shown as Gurdev Singh, whereas in the subscription voucher the name of the complainant is written as Gurjant Raj. The complainant was requested many times to bring the SV voucher so that it may be sent to the company for correction, but he did not listen and totally adamant to get the supply in the name of Gurjant Raj. He used to get the supply from the opposite party till 22-5-2012. Thereafter, the supply was stopped as per the order of Ministry of Petroleum vide which the direction was issued to the opposite parties to get the KYC Form filled from the consumers. The complainant was requested many times but he did not care and was getting the supply of gas and ultimately, the supply was stopped otherwise the opposite parties would have to pay commercial charges. The opposite parties have to follow the orders and the directions issued by Ministry of Petroleum, from time to time. Adhoc supply of Sukhda Gas Agency was given to opposite party No. 2 in 2007, but no manual official record was given. Sukhda agency was terminated by IOC. KYC Form scheme was launched by Ministry of Petroleum in September, 2012.

4. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

5. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

6. In the case in hand, the allegation of the complainant is that the opposite parties are not supplying the LPG cylinders to him on the plea that his name in the record is different and he did not produce the required documents to get his name changed, but he has already submitted the required documents and got the name changed as per Ex. C-12 & Ex. C-13 whereas the plea of the opposite parties for not supplying the LPG cylinders to the complainant is that KYC Form scheme was launched by Ministry of Petroleum in September, 2012 and as per their directions, the supply of the LPG cylinders cannot be effected without submission of KYC Form by the consumers.

7. A perusal of documents Ex. C-12 & Ex. C-13 reveals that no doubt these documents have been stamped by Paramveer Gas Service on 22-07-2009, but on these documents neither the name of complainant nor SV number is written. The complainant moved application before the SDM vide Ex. C-5 and the SDM vide Ex. C-6 directed the opposite party Nos. 2 & 3 to take action as per rules. The complainant has not produced any document on file that thereafter he approached the opposite parties or submitted any further documents. The opposite parties have pleaded that they have received CD from Sukhda Gas Service and no manual record has been received and the said CD displayed the name of complainant as Gurdev Singh. The customer history card Ex. OP-2 shows that the name of complainant has been written as Gurdev Singh meaning thereby that the name against aforesaid SV number is Gurdev Singh in the record of opposite party Nos. 2 & 3. The complainant has alleged in para No. 3 of his complaint that the opposite parties supplied him refill till 2-5-2012. The pleading of the opposite party Nos. 2 & 3 is that the complainant has not shown/given them the original subscription voucher so that the name of the complainant can be got corrected in the Company's record. The complainant has not produced any evidence on file to prove that he submitted/shown original subscription voucher to the opposite party Nos. 2 & 3. Moreover, the Ministry of Petroleum has launched a scheme in September, 2012 vide which every consumer of LPG is required to submit KYC Form. Keeping in view the necessity of LPG refills in these days, this Forum is of the considered opinion that the complainant is entitled to the regular supply of LPG refills but after submission/showing the original subscription voucher and submission of KYC Form duly filled and signed with opposite party No. 3.

8. In view of what has been discussed above, this complaint is accepted without any order as to costs against opposite parties. The complainant is directed to submit original subscription voucher and KYC Form duly filled and signed with opposite party 3 within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and thereafter within next 30 days the opposite parties will immediately change the name of complainant in their record and restore the supply of LPG refill to the complainant.

   The complete compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

   A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to record.

   Pronounced in open Forum

   25-06-2013

   (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

   President

    

    

    

   (Amarjeet Paul) Member

    

    

   (Sukhwinder Kaur)

   Member