DINESH KUMAR Vs. CHAUHAN GAS AGENCY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT was having LP gas connection of the gas manufactured by the respondent No. 2 and supplied by the respondent No. 1. Though initially there was complaint of leakage of gas from the cylinder which according to the respondent No. 1 was rectified but within three days there was violent explosion in the kitchen of the appellant resulting in fire due to leakage of the gas from the pipe as a result of which several kitchen appliances and other household goods were destroyed. On account of loss suffered by him, instant complaint seeking actual expenses of Rs. 87,200 and Rs. 1 lac as compensation and Rs. 15,000 as cost of litigation was filed by the appellant.

(2.) VIDE impugned order dated 11.2.2005 passed by the District Forum the complaint was dismissed merely on the premise that on the perusal of the entries in the complaint register of the respondent No. 1 for the month of June, 2004 show that there were three complaints with regard to change of pipe and 26 complaints with regard to the change of regulator but there was no mention of complaint of leakage lodged by the appellant or his wife.

(3.) HOWEVER plea was raised by the respondent No. 1 that on receiving complaint that there was leakage from the old pipe, an employee of the respondent No. 1 went to the house of the appellant and cut both ends of the pipe and readjusted it. It was after three days that the violent explosion took place. We fail to understand as to what was the reason for explosion. No plea was raised by any of respondent as to cause of explosion. Prima facie due to manufacturing defect either in the cylinder or regulator or in the pipe explosion was caused.