Decided on June 10,2003

Director/Manager, Shri Shakthi Lpg Gas Ltd. Respondents


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 delay. 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. ;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.