BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 19/12/2013
Date of Order : 12/12/2014
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Sheen Jose, Member.
Smt. V.K. Beena Kumari, Member.
C.C. No. 876/2013
Between
Padmanabhan Kalson, | :: | Complainant |
S/o. K.B. Padmanabhan, 136/D, Railway Quarters, Ernakulam – 682 016. | | (Party-in-person) |
And
1. Territory Manager (LPG), Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., | :: | Opposite Parties |
Territory Office, Ambalamughal, Kerala – 682 302. 2. M/s. Rose Flames Bharat Gas, Bharat Gas Distributor, Code No. 21856, Kaloor-Kadavanthra Road, Cochin – 682 017. | | (Op.pty 1 by Adv. P.U. Ziyad, Kalabhavan Road, Kochi – 18.) (Op.pty 2 by party-in-person) |
O R D E R
A. Rajesh, President.
1. Shortly stated, the facts of the complainant's case are as follows :-
The complainant is a consumer of the 2nd opposite party. On 24-10-2012, the complainant booked refilled gas cylinder with the 1st opposite party. While booking the same, the 1st opposite party intimated that the same has been booked in favour of one Sarvamangala. The complainant complained about the anomaly and re-booked the refilled cylinder on 02-11-2012. Thereafter, the complainant approached the 2nd opposite party to get the cylinder, the 2nd opposite party informed that it will be delivered within a month. Finally, the 2nd opposite party issued a refilled cylinder on 17-11-2012. Thereafter, the complainant booked for a refilled cylinder and it was informed by the 2nd opposite party that the booking has been in favour of one Thirumannip. The complainant registered a complaint with the 1st opposite party and the 2nd opposite party delivered a cylinder on 11-12-2012. Accordingly, the complainant booked for refilled cylinder on 15-01-2013. At the instance of the 1st opposite party, the 2nd opposite party delivered a cylinder on 07-02-2013. Thereafter on 05-08-2013, the complainant received another cylinder and re-booked for a cylinder on 22-08-2013. In spite of repeated complaints, the 2nd opposite party could deliver the cylinder only on 04-11-2013. Though the opposite parties agreed to deliver the gas cylinder within 48 days from the date of booking, there is inordinate delay on the part of the opposite parties in delivery of the gas cylinders. Thus, the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite parties to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation and also seeking direction against the opposite parties to deliver refilled gas cylinder at least within 30 days from the date of delivery.
2. The defense of the 1st opposite party is as follows :-
If the booking of the gas is through SMS, the booking will be registered automatically. The requisite number of cylinders for distribution to customers are supplied by the 1st opposite party promptly to the 2nd opposite party. The prompt action was taken with respect to the complaints sent by the complainant to the 1st opposite party, directing the 2nd opposite party to take corrective action against the complainant immediately. The complainant is not entitled to get any of the reliefs as prayed for.
3. The version of the 2nd opposite party is as follows :-
When an LPG cylinder is booked through SMS which automatically gets in the LPG software system and the booking is recorded in the name of the customer. In such bookings, the distributor has no role. Normally, the LPG cylinder will last for 32 to 45 days depending upon the number of inmates in a family. After a cylinder is availed the customer can book the cylinder on the very next day, so that the customer will get the next cylinder within a month's time. The complainant tried his best through SMS booking and his number was not registered in the system of the 2nd opposite party. Naturally, he will not get a cylinder from the 2nd opposite party, though the LPG software system is developed by the 1st opposite party. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the 2nd opposite party and the complaint is liable to be rejected.
4. No oral evidence was adduced by the parties. Ext. A1 was marked on the side of the complainant. Heard the complainant who appeared in person and the learned counsel for the 1st opposite party.
5. The points that came up for consideration are as follows :-
Whether the complainant is entitled to get refilled gas cylinders within 30 days from the date of booking?
Whether the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation and costs of the proceedings to the complainant.
6. Point No. i. :- Admittedly, the complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties. According to the complainant, he is not getting refilled gas cylinder from the 2nd opposite party promptly against the booking through SMS. Both the opposite parties stated that the system of booking gas by customers through SMS is prevailing and there is no chance to by- pass the seniority of a customer. The complainant maintains that he could not book the refilled cylinder through SMS, since on 2 occasions the booking had effected in favour of third parties. During the proceedings in this Forum, the complainant produced the advertisement of the 1st opposite party in their website in which it is stated as follows :-
“Endeavour to Home Deliver safe and sound refill cylinders within 48 hours of booking in normal situations.”
However, the relief of the complainant is very limited. He is seeking direction against the opposite parties to issue the refilled cylinder at least within 30 days from the date of booking. The above claim of the complainant appears to be genuine and sustainable in law. The opposite parties are liable to honour the undertaking in the website. In that case, a direction against the opposite parties to deliver the refilled gas cylinder without over looking the seniority of the complainant is enough to abate the agony of the complainant. It is to be noted that the Rule governing supply and distribution of gas cylinder is Liquified Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order 2000. In the said order, neither the dead line for the delivery of refilled gas cylinder from the date of booking nor the scheduled supply of the same been stated. Therefore, the unilateral fixing of time limit for refilled gas cylinder is unjustifiable and amounts to deficiency in service.
7. Point No. ii. :- In the instant case, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, therefore, we refrain from awarding compensation to the complainant.
8. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct that the opposite parties shall deliver the refilled gas cylinder to the complainant within a maximum period of 30 days from the date of booking. Ordered accordingly.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 12th day of December 2014.
Forwarded/By Order, Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Sheen Jose, Member.
Sd/- V.K. Beena Kumari, Member.
Senior Superintendent.
A P P E N D I X
Complainant's Exhibits :-
Exhibit A1 | :: | Copy of the letter dt. 18-09-2013 |
Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil
=========
