IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday, the 30th day of March, 2017
Filed on 20.06.2015
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
C.C.No.190/2015
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri. Noushad. S. 1. The Proprietor
Kattunkal House Vallakkalil Bharat Gas Agency
Pazhaveedu Village Thiruvambady P.O.
Sanathanapuram P.O. Alappuzha
Alappuzha (By Adv. S. Murugan)
(By Adv. Ganesh. P.)
2. The Territory Manager
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Ambalamugal
Kochi – 682 302
(By Adv. Menon & Pai)
O R D E R
SMT.ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The complainants’ case is as follows:-
The complainant had submitted application for a domestic gas connection on 7.12.2013 to the first opposite party with sufficient documents. The first opposite party issued receipt for the same to the complainant and made him believe that gas connection would be available within a month and payment can be made only on receipt of connection. Since he received neither gas connection nor intimation from the agency, he visited the agency office on 14.12.2014 to enquire about the inordinate delay. To the utter surprise of the complainant, the Proprietor told him to submit a fresh application so that he can take further steps. But the complainant not ready to submit fresh application as he was waiting for the gas connection since 2013. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the complaint is filed.
2. The version of the first opposite party is as follows:-
The complainant is not a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. At the time of registration, the opposite party had collected KYC form and copy of the relevant documents. As per the directions of the 2nd opposite party when a party approaches any of the distributors for getting gas connection under the subsidized schemes at first the agency will direct the party to fill up the KYC form and also to submit the photo copies of Ration Card, Adhar, Bank passbook along with one passport size photo. Then the party will be directed to come and enquire about the same in a week’s time. On receipt of the details the same would be fed into the registration site of the BPCL to know whether the party had taken any other connection under the subsidy scheme from any of the Public Limited Petroleum/Gas Companies such as BPCL Indian Oil H.P. The details fed into the system as above would automatically get deleted. The photo copies of documents collected would also be destroyed by that time. The complainant approached the opposite party and submitted the KYC form and copies of the relevant documents on 7.12.2013. At that time the first opposite party’s office was functioning on the side of the NH 47 near Chudukadu Junction. The said office was shifted to the present premises during August 2014. On 7.12.2013 the complainant was asked to come and enquire about the status of his application within a week’s time. But he has not turned up till 13.12.2014 for the reasons best known to him. In the meantime the first opposite party’s office got shifted as stated above. So when the complainant approached the first opposite party on 14.12.2014, the first opposite party detailed to him that since he has not come forward within time, the details which were fed into the system got deleted and so he has to submit a fresh KYC form along with the copies of documents. But complainant threatened that he will file complaints against the first opposite party. Even now the opposite parties are ready to give new connection if the complainant submitted fresh KYC form along with copies of relevant documents. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the first opposite party.
3. The version of the 2nd opposite party is as follows:-
It is learned from the 1st opposite party that the complainant had applied for LPG connection on 7.12.2013 at Vallakkalil Bharat Gas, Alappuzha. It is also learnt from that although the complainant submitted the KYC form, the complainant had not turned up till 14.12.2014. It is thus evident that the complainant was lethargic as he had approached the 1st opposite party only after a year of filing the KYC forms. The complainant had not approached the first opposite party in time and the same tantamount to negligence on the side of the complainant. The complainant is not entitled to seek any reliefs in the complaint.
4. The complainant was examined as PW1. The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A6. One witness was examined as PW2. On the side of the opposite parties there is no oral or documentary evidence are adduced.
5. Regarding the point whether the complainant is a consumer, this Forum passed an order on 20.6.2015 finding that complainant is a consumer and the complaint is maintainable.
6. The next points for considerations are:-
i) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
ii) If so, the relief and costs?
7. The complainant’s case is that he has applied for a gas connection with the first opposite party on 7.12.2013. On 14.12.2014 he enquired about the application, but the first opposite party did not furnish proper information regarding the same. On the next day he contacted the Proprietor who insisted to submit a fresh application, but the complainant was not willing to submit the fresh application. In the version filed by the first opposite party it is stated that after the submission of application by the complainant, he was asked to come to the office of the opposite party within one week, but the complainant did not turn up. In the meanwhile the office of the opposite party was shifted to the present place. On 14.12.2014 when the complainant visited the first opposite party, he insisted for fresh application, since the details of the complainant’s earlier application including KYC fed to the computer got deleted. As stated above the complainant was not prepared to furnish the 2nd application with details. It is also alleged in the complaint that complainant suffered much harassment from the opposite parties. During the course of trial, the opposite parties offered a fresh connection to the complainant if he is prepared to submit a proper KYC form along with copies of the relevant documents. But the complainant was adamant on his earlier stand and he insists to get the gas connection on his first application. While the complainant was examined before the Forum, this Forum asked to the complainant that, “Gas connection Xcmw F¶p opposite party ]d-ªn«pw Xm¦Ä F´p-sIm-mWv \ntj-[n-¨Xv?” The complainant answered that, “ ]pXnb At]£ sImSp-¡m³ X¿m-d-Ã. AXp-sIm-mWv ths-¶p-sh-¨Xv.” So it is clear that the complainant was not willing to furnish a fresh application for getting gas connection. The complainant did not adduce any evidence to show that he has obtained another connection or he is still having no connection. If the complainant is still having no gas connection, it is due to his own adamant stand not to make a 2nd application before the opposite party or any other agency. It is also pertinent to notice that the offer made by the 2nd opposite party to sanction a fresh connection is also refused by the complainant insisting on his demand to give sanction to the connection on the basis of the first application. The first opposite party stated that the first application submitted by the complainant is deleted from the computer, if so it is impossible to sanction a fresh connection without a fresh application. It is of course a deficiency in service from the part of the first opposite party in not preferring the first application and at the same time the stand taken by the complainant is found to be quite unreasonable. The prayer in the complaint is also sticking on the adamant stand to sanction the gas connection on the basis of the application dated 7.12.2013, which relief being an impossible to insist to sanction a gas connection on the basis of the application which is non-est cannot be allowed by this Forum.
In the light of the above discussion this Forum is of considered opinion that the complainant is not entitled to the relief asked as such. But on an equitable ground this Forum is allowing complaint in part granding the following reliefs:-
a) The first opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as compensation for the missing of complainant’s first application form from his custody.
b)The opposite parties are directed to sanction a fresh gas connection to the complainant if the complainant submits a fresh application for gas connection complying with all formalities within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in Open Forum on this the 30th day of March, 2017.
Sd/-Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/-Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
Sd/-Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Naushad (Witness)
PW2 - Siddik. K.N. (Witness)
Ext.A1 - Receipt
Ext.A2 - Photo copy of the Ration Card 1st page
Ext.A3 - Copy of the letter dated 5.2.2014
Ext.A4 - Receipt from Deputy Police Superintendent dated 27.12.2014
Ext.A5 - Letter dated 29.12.2014
Ext.A6(1) - True copy of the letter dated 5.1.2015
Ext.A6(2) - Postal receipt
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
//True Copy//
By Order,
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/SF
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
