P.B.SRINIVASA RAO Vs. DIRECTOR/MANAGER, SHRI SHAKTHI LPG GAS LTD.
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Director/Manager, Shri Shakthi Lpg Gas Ltd.
Click here to view full judgement.
P.RAMAKRISHNAM RAJU,PRESIDENT -
(1.) THIS is an
application to condone the delay of 20 days in filing the appeal. What is
stated in the petitioners affidavit is that the District Forum disposed
of the C.D. on 29.11.2002 and the order copy was despatched on 11.12.2002
and received by the petitioner on 15.12.2002. He sent the appeal papers
through courier on 10.1.2003 and left for Sabarimalai. Due to shifting of
the State Forum courier boys could not identify the office and the said
cover returned to his Counsel on 3rd week of January, 2003. Hence the
This explanation cannot be accepted. There was no shifting of the State Forum as alleged. As such the basis for the request for condonation of the delay is unreal. However, he filed returned courier cover with endorsement œShifted to un -known place The address of the cover shows R.P. Road, Hyderabad which is incorrect as there is no R.P. Road in Hyderabad but in Secunderabad. In view of the incorrect address perhaps the cover might have been returned. Having sent a letter to the incorrect address the appellant cannot take advantage of his mistake. The petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed.
Even otherwise there are no merits in the appeal.
(2.) THE case of the complainant/appellant is that he being a customer of Shakthi L.P.G. Gas from 1995 onwards deposited an amount of
Rs. 1,500/ - by way of D.D. initially out of which an amount of Rs.
1,250/ - was refundable at the time of cancellation of gas connection. As he intimated for cancellation of the service and for refund of the
deposited amount and as there was no response from the opposite parties
he approached the District Forum.
(3.) THE District Forum directed the Ist respondent to pay an amount of Rs. 500/ - to the complainant towards costs. In view of deposit of DD
for Rs. 1,800/ - on 14.6.2002 by the Ist respondent, the District Forum
refused to grant the claim of the complainant for refund of Rs. 1,250 and
Rs. 5,000/ - towards compensation. We are of the view that having regard
to the circumstances the District Forum felt that no further compensation
need be awarded as the 2nd respondent has deposited the admitted amount.
Costs are discretion of the lower Court. Having regard to the
circumstances we do not find that there is any miscarriage of justice by
not awarding costs as claimed by the complainant. The appeal therefore
fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Appeal dismissed. ;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.