KRISHAN MURARI Vs. NAVJYOTI GAS SERVICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is substantially concluded in favour of the consumer appellant by our recent decision in 1993 C. P. C.502 Vijay Kumar Managing Director V/s. M/s. Hamdard Wakf Laboratory Delhi and Others.

(2.) For the limited purpose of adjudicating on the quantum of compensation, to which the successful complainant appellant was entitled, it is unnecessary to delve into the facts and merits too deeply. It suffices to mention that the appellant admittedly held a double bottle connection for the supply of L. P. G. through the respondents M/s. Navjoyti Gas Service. On the 7th of December, 1992 refil cylinder No.71797 was issued to him, which within four to five dates thereafter stopped to supply Gas. On weighing the same it was found to be 27 kgs. only and a complaint was lodged with the respondents, who desired that he said cylinder be left at their premises for checking purposes which was done. Inevitably, the appellant opted for another refil against the second cylinder which in turn was found to be equally defective and patently short in weight. The second complaint was again lodged with the respondents without any meaningful redress and instead the delivery of another gas cylinder was further delayed till the 22nd of January, 1993. Aggrieved thereby the competent was preferred seeking compensation to the turne off Rs.11,000/-.

(3.) On notice being issued, the respondents admitted the broad factual position. It was the case that the first cylinder on inspection having apparently been found defective and underweight was forwarded to the bottling plant for examination. It was also pleaded that the second refil was issued and that too had to be taken back as defective being under weight.