HEM LATA Vs. RAMESH THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are being disposed of by a common order, as in both of them, the same order, i.e. order dated 23.04.2013, of learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Shimla, has been assailed. Appeals have been filed by two of the three opposite parties, against whom respondent -complainant Ramesh Thakur, had filed a complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

(2.) ADMITTED facts are that complainant Ramesh Thakur had been released an LPG connection by M/s. Vineet Gas Agency, appellant in F.A. No.158 of 2013. Gas used to be supplied in cylinders. Cylinders used to be got filled by the Indian Oil Corporation and made available to M/s. Vineet Gas Agency, the aforesaid appellant and hereinafter referred to as opposite party No.1, for sale/supply to the customers attached with his agency. The Indian Oil Corporation, which was impleaded as opposite party No.3 in the complaint, had purchased an insurance policy from United India Insurance Company, impleaded as opposite party No.2 and appellant in F.A. No.166 of 2013. Policy, inter alia, provided for indemnification of customers/gas connection holders in the event of their suffering any damage or loss arising out of any accident caused by use/handling of LPG cylinders.

(3.) RESPONDENT /complainant Ramesh Thakur had been supplied a gas cylinder on 24.12.2008. On 21.01.2009, early in the morning, his wife changed the aforesaid cylinder with the old one, as gas in the old cylinder had run out. When she tried to ignite the stove, the pipe caught fire, leading to bursting of cylinder. Wife of the complainant sustained some injuries. Kitchen and all the adjoining rooms, forming residence of the complainant and his brother were badly damaged. Household goods were also damaged. Loss to the tune of '4.00 -5.00 lacs had allegedly been sustained. Report was lodged with the police immediately. Intimation of accident was given to opposite party No.1, i.e. Vineet Gas Agency also. Complainant was not indemnified by any of the three opposite parties and, therefore, he filed a complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, seeking a direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs. 4.50 lacs as compensation, breakup of which, as per complaint is as follows: -