RENUKA GAS COMPANY Vs. SIDDESHWAR & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) EVEN though the Union of India has issued guidelines to all Distributors and Manufacturers of Cylinders to educate the consumers from time -to -time regarding the use of cylinders, we are coming across cases where due to lack of education regarding use of cylinders, number of accidents are occurring causing severe injuries and deaths of innocents in some cases. The District Forums and this Commission have been directing the Distributors/Manufacturers of Cylinders/Insurance Companies to pay compensation. But that is not a solution to the problem. Therefore, the Distributors/Manufacturers of Cylinders should educate the consumers on war footing basis and periodically check the Cylinders and Gas Stoves and supply/fix only ISI mark bearing Stoves, Regulators and fire proof pipes and take such other safety measures to minimize accidents. In the case on hand, due to leakage of gas from Cylinder, there was explosion, causing severe injuries to two persons and death of one person.

(2.) THESE three Appeals are by the Insurance Company, Manufacturer of Cylinder and the Distributors of Cylinders challenging the Order dated 17.7.2006 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Belgaum, in Complaint No. 230/2004, by which the District Forum has allowed the Complaint of the Complainants.

(3.) THE case of the Complainants is that due to the negligence on the part of the supplier of Cylinder, there was leakage of gas, which ultimately resulted in explosion, in which two persons sustained severe injuries and one person died. The Insurance Company after coming to know of the accident appointed a Surveyor to inspect the spot and submit a report. The Surveyor submitted a report stating that there was a defect in the tube and also due to use of a different Regulator the accident occurred. The Union of India has issued guidelines to all Distributors and Manufacturers of Cylinders to educate the consumers regarding the use of Cylinders. In the instant case, the Manufacturer and Distributors have not produced any evidence to show that they have instructed the consumer to change the Cylinder and the Regulator. In the absence of such evidence, we are of the view that there is a failure on the part of the servants of the Distributor and the Manufacturer of Cylinders in not properly educating the consumers regarding the use of the Cylinder. Therefore, in our view, taking into cosideration the injuries suffered and also death of one person, the District Forum is right in awarding the compensation of Rs. 3,68,400 in favour of the Complainants with interest at 8% per annum.