MONALISA GAS SERVICE vs RAJESHKUMAR PUNAMCHAND SHAH

THE appellant is the original opposite party who is distributing gas cylinders. THE complainant is an applicant for gas cylinder and was entitled to receive the gas connection as per his term. THE opposite party stated that they have already given the gas connection by delivering the cylinder and regulator and, therefore, the complaint should be dismissed. THE complainant has stated and submitted before the District Forum that he had not received any gas cylinder or regulator and, therefore, the contention of the opposite party was wrong.

IN this case the opposite party has not only alleged to have delivered the gas cylinder and regulator but also rendered some services thereafter. After hearing both the parties, the District Forum has accepted the case of the complainant and passed an order directing the opposite party to consider him as a consumer and give him gas connection immediately. This order was passed to give immediate connection to the complainant, the opposite party did not carry out the order of the District Forum and, therefore, the complainant filed an execution proceeding before the Civil Judge, J.D. Kalol. It appears that on 11.2.93 the opposite party has given a purshish stating that without prejudice to his right to file appeal, he has agreed to release the gas connection on or before 15.2.93. The complainant has produced the kabulatnama with the appeal.

It appears that instead of delivering the cylinder and regulator to the complainant, the opposite party appears to have filed a complaint against the complainant and according to the learned Advocate of the complainant, this complaint has been falsely filed against them with the intention not to release the gas connection by delivering the cylinder and regulator.

WE have heard the learned Advocates of both the parties. Since there is an allegation that the gas cylinder and regulator have already been delivered to the complainant and there after some services have also been effected, we directed both the parties to file an affidavit to that effect so that proper action can be taken if the affidavit is found to be false. Mr. Rajesh kumar P. Shah, the respondent herein has filed an affidavit stating that he has neither received the gas connection till today nor has he received any subsequent services. On the request to bring the ration card etc., he had gone to the office of the opposite party (Appellant) and submitted the ration card etc. to enable the gas company to deliver the cylinder etc. after due verification. He was assured by Shri Narayanbhai that the office has closed at 12 O''clock and the monies are payable only after 2.30 and, therefore, the complainant may come in the evening. Mr. Naik, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent states that as a matter of fact, this gas connection has been given to one Mr. Devendra K. Sharma who is in no way connected with the complainant and the cylinder and regulator have been seized by the police under panchnama. Considering these facts, it clearly appears to us that the opposite party has not delivered the gas connection to the complainant who had personally gone and delivered the ration card etc. Since there is criminal proceedings pending, we do not want to express any opinion though we are convinced that there is not only clear deficiency in service but the appellant is also atleast negligent towards discharging of his duties and thereby causing much inconvenience and suffering to the complainant. WE find no substance in this appeal. The appellant after giving assurance to the Court that he will deliver the cylinder on or about 15.2.93 has also not carried out that assurance. We are, therefore, of the opinion the appellant should be saddled atleast with the cost of Rs. 2000/-. ORDER The appeal is dismissed with cost. The cost is quantified at Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), which the appellant shall pay to the respondent within 4 weeks from the date of the receipt of this order. Appeal dismissed with costs.