Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs P.P. NARSINGA RAO

THESE appeals coming on for hearing upon perusing the memo of grounds appeals and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. N Kama Raju Advocate for the appellant in CDA No. 318/92 and the respondent No. 2 in CDA No. 87/93 and of Mr. K. Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for the respondent No. 2 in CDA No. 318/ 92 and for the appellant in CDA No. 87/93 and respondent No. 1 in CDA No. 87/93 not appearing in person or by Advocate, the Court made the following order:

THESE two appeals arise out of a common order passed in C.D. No. 3/92 on the file of the District Forum, Hyderabad. The facts briefly stated are as follows : The complainant on 31.7.1982 booked for H.P. Gas connection under Registration No. 83595 with Satya Tulasi Agencies. No amount was paid on the booking. According to him, he made number of representations to the opposite parties on coming to know that the persons who booked for the gas connection much later than him, got their connections but he was not released any gas connection. He therefore filed the complaint to release the new gas connection to him and claimed Rs. 6,000/- by way of compensation. Although both the opposite parties appeared opposite party No. 1 filed counter stating that the registration was without payment of any amount and the complaint was filed 10 years after the registration. As the cause of action arose before the commencement of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 it is not maintainable. It was further stated that in 1988, fresh guidelines were issued by the Ministry stating that new connections would be given on making certain deposit and inspite of the same being advertised in the papers, the complainant did not make any application for new connection. It was also stated that the address given by the complainant at the time of registration is quite different and that he is not a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act.

Exhs. A.1 and A.2 were marked for the complainant and the Counsels for both parties, were heard. The District Forum held that by alloting Registration number to the complainant the opposite parties agreed to render him the service by issuing new LPG connection, when his turn came. Therefore, the complainant is a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the said Act. It, however, held that the complainant is justified in waiting for a communication from the opposite party and the opposite party did not inform the complainant about the fresh procedure for fresh connections in 1988. It is also repelled the contention that the complainants barred by limitation. If, therefore, directed that the first opposite party to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 3000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of the order or if the opposite party so chooses to give a new LPG connection along with costs of Rs. 300/- to be given to the complainant within two months from the date of this order.

AGGRIEVED by the said order, the dealer i.e. Satya Tulasi Agencies preferred CDA 87/93 and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation preferred CDA 318/92. Since common questions arises for consideration, these two appeals are disposed of together. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellants that no amount was paid at the time of registration and hence the complainant is not a consumer and question of deficiency of service does not arise. It is also submitted that the complainant should have applied for fresh registration on payment in 1988 when it was advertised in the news papers. But it is to be seen that the complainant registered for gas connection and the registration was accepted by the opposite party and the opposite party did not intimate the complainant at any point of time that fresh registration has to be made. The appellants'' counsel also raised the contention that the complaint was filed beyond period of limitation. It was only on 20th August, 1991 the cancellation of the said registration was made and he was advised to register afresh. The complaint was filed in the year 1991 and it is not barred by limitation. Since the respondent herein is not very particular of claiming damages and he wants only gas connection instead of the compensation amount and costs awarded by the District Forum. We consider it appropriates to direct the respondents i.e., the appellant herein, to give gas connection to the complainant on his paying all the amounts required for gas connection. This is without prejudice to the contentions of the appellants and in view of the peculiar circumstances of the case. It is also made clear that this direction will not be a precedent for granting such relief in future.

THE amount deposited by the opposite parties in the District Forum by the order of this Commission on 28.11.92 and 4.3.1993 shall be refunded to the respective opposite parties. The complainant shall approach the opposite party No. 2, the concerned dealer and make all the necessary deposits within a period of two weeks from today. On making such deposit or deposits the opposite party No. 2 shall write to the opposite party No. 1 for release of gas connection to the complainant and the opposite party No. 1 shall pass orders of giving connection to the complainant within a period of six weeks from the date of communication from the second opposite party. In the result of the order of the District Forum is modified to that extent. There shall be no order as to costs. Order modified.