UNIVERSAL CYLINDERS LIMITED vs MESSRS CENTURY GASES AND PETROCHEMICALS LIMITED

THE applicant has filed an application for compensation under Section 12-B of the MRTP Act, 1969 (the Act for brief) stating that the respondent issued an advertisement to the effect that it had started its bulk LPG Division and was Willing to supply the same @ Rs. 13,500/- per MT (ex-Okha). It has been further stated that in response thereto, the applicant who is marketing LPG gas, approached the respondent indicating its interest in buying LPG gas from it and further requested for terms and conditions of its Supply. It has been added that on receipt of the details of the terms and conditions from the respondent through its letter dated 12.4.1997, the necessary documents alongwith two demand draft Nos. 324165 and 324166 both dated 17.4.1997 of Rs. 1,82,520/- each were sent. THE grievance of the applicant is that although the respondent issued delivery orders dated 18.4.1997 against these demand drafts and asked the applicant to obtain that delivery, the delivery orders were not executed and no LPG gas was made available by the respondent. It has been complained that thereafter, even though applicant made representations and sent reminders, there was no response except one letter dated 29.7.1997 wherein the respondent agreed to pay back the amount after a few days but no refund was made. THE applicant has by way relief, not only claimed refund of the amount but also interest on the above amount as well as an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- on the ground of losses suffered due to non-supply, Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of mental agony and Rs. 50,000/- as costs of the present proceeding.

THE respondent was represented only on 28.5.1998 and thereafter in spite of several opportunities, neither a reply was filed on its behalf nor it was represented by Advocate or an authorised representative. Accordingly, the respondent was set ex parte. From the affidavit of evidence filed on behalf of the applicant, it appears that the applicant sent two demand drafts of Rs. 1,82,520/- each totalling Rs.3,65,040/- but neither LPG gas was supplied by the respondent nor refund of the amount was made. It also transpires that the applicant asked for refund of the amount and from the letter of the respondent annexed with the compensation application, it appears that the respondent agreed to pay back the amount but the payment has not been forthcoming in spite of the letters and even the legal notice sent by the applicant. It appears from the compensation application and the applicant''s affidavit of evidence which remain uncontroverted, that the respondent issued an advertisement and offered to supply LPG gas @ Rs. 13,500/- per metric tonne but failed to do so even though payment of Rs. 3,65,040/- through two demand drafts was made in advance. In other words, it appears that the respondent made a false, misleading and deceptive advertisement with a view to luring gullible customers like the applicant to make payment for supply of LPG gas which the respondent had no intention to supply and which was not delivered and thus can be said to have adopted and indulged in unfair trade practices within the meaning of Section 36A(1) of the Act. In view of the above, there is no escape from the conclusion that the applicant has suffered loss and damage on account of the aforesaid unfair trade practices by and on behalf of the respondent especially as there is no explanation by the respondent for not supplying the gas or making the refund.

The applicant can thus be said to have established a case of unfair trade practices against the respondent and has also shown to have suffered loss and damage on account of the aforesaid unfair trade practices. Accordingly, the respondent is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 3,65,040/- with interest @ 18% which is the rate being allowed by the Commission in all such compensation cases under Section 12B of the Act.

IT also follows that the applicant must have suffered a loss of business due to non- supply of gas by the respondent as it is likely that the applicant booked orders of consumers of LPG gas but could not make the supply to them. Accordingly, it is appropriate that the applicant is compensated for this loss. A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- appears to be adequate and is awarded as compensation on that account. As regards the compensation for mental agony, no separate amount deserves to be awarded as certain risk is inherent in trade and business ventures and all businessmen and traders are expected to take the rough and the smooth in their stride. IT is common knowledge that not all business deals end up in profit. There are ups and downs in business as in other walks of life and businessmen are supposed to be mentally tough to face the down turn in business as part of the game. As regards the litigation expenses and costs of present proceeding, an amount of Rs. 5,000/- is computed as costs and is awarded accordingly. The respondent is directed to make compliance with the order within six weeks from the date of its pronouncement. Application disposed of.