JAGIR SINGH JATT vs SUKH GAS SERVICE

JAGIR Singh Jatt, a resident of House No. 3385, Sector 47-D, Chandigarh instituted a complaint that he had been running a Charitable Ayurvedic Dawakhana for the poor and needy persons and Sukh Gas Services in vicinity had been deficient in not supplying the gas according to his entitlement. He demanded a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- on account of deficiency. The complaint was dismissed by the District Forum when an assurance was given in writing on 6.8.1998 that the respondent shall supply as many as cylinders demanded by him and certainly up to 10 cylinders immediately on his advance booking on 7.2.2000. However no damages were granted for the deficiency and the complainant JAGIR Singh Jatt has preferred this appeal.

BRIEFLY the facts are that Jagir Singh Jatt is running a Charitable Ayurvedic Dawakhana at his house for poor and the needy. He is registered with the respondent Gas Company for the supply of refills vide Consumer No. 9794. His demand was ignored during January, 1998 to March, 1998. Besides this in April, 1998, he demanded 4 cylinders but his request was declined. The complainant approached the Appropriate Authority of Indian Oil Corporation but of no avail. He wanted a direction from the District Forum that the respondent should supply in 4 refills every month and damages to the tune of Rs. 5,000/- for the deficiency in services alleged and referred to above. The respondent filed a reply wherein the allegations have been denied and according to them no Charitable Dawakhana is run by the appellant. Specific instructions from the Government for supply of 4 refills has also been denied. The respondent had been supplying whatever the number of cylinders booked by the appellant. A perusal of the receipts and the Consumer History Card shows that the appellant has been described as a ''non-domestic consumer''. Besides this, this consumer has been described specifically as under : "Jagir Singh Jatt, Charitable Ayurvedic Dawakhana, 3385/47-D, Chandigarh."

and the entries of cylinders supplied to him find mention on the reverse of this card. All these entries have been made by the respondent and not by the appellant who has scarcely placed his signatures in Landa. Thus the plea of the appellant that he is running a Charitable Ayurvedic Dawakhana has not been suitably rebutted.

Though the representative of the respondent has now given an assurance on 7.2.2000 that they shall supply gas cylinders as and when booked even if it is up to 10 cylinders every month yet he has not been awarded any compensation for the deficiency he suffered and which compelled him to come to the District Forum. The details placed by the complainant regarding his eligibility and assurance now made on 7.2.2000 established that the complainant was really a bona fide consumer. There is no such allegation at all that he has ever misused even a single cylinder or sold it in the black market.

AFTER considering all these facts and hearing the appellant in person and also learned Counsel for the respondent and the evidence on the record, we accept this appeal and besides the assurance given by the respondent we also hereby order that the respondent shall pay a compensation of Rs. 1,000/- to the appellant within 3 months of this order. Appeal accepted.