GAJENDRA NAYAKCOMPLAINA Vs. SANGRAMI GAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this complaint filed under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complainant has claimed compensation of Rs. 9,50,000 from the opposite parties.

(2.) THE sum and substance of the grievance of the complainant is that the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable for the negligence in supplying a defective LPG cylinder to him for which there was outbreak of fire resulting in death of her daughter and sustaining injuries by himself and other family members and loss of household properties. Briefly stated the complainants case is that he is a consumer of LPG manufactured and supplied by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (opposite party No. 2) through its dealer M/s. Sangrami Gas - opposite party No. 1. On consideration of his application for supply of LPG gas he was allotted Consumer No. 2610. He duly deposited the costs of the LPG. cylinder at the time of allotment of the consumer number. On 19.4.2001 he booked for supply of LPG cylinder to the opposite party No. 1. On the next day i.e., on 10.4.2001 a filled LPG cylinder was supplied to him on payment of its price. On 25.5.2001 at about 7.15 p.m. there was failure of power supply in his house. Therefore, all the family members were sitting in the dining room by lighting candles. Prasant Kumar Swain, a relative went to the kitchen to connect the regulator to the gas cylinder. While removing the safety cap to connect the regulator, there was leakage of gas from the cylinder. The gas spread into the kitchen room, dining room and bed -room which caught fire by the burning of candles kept in the dining room. As a result the complainant and his daughter - Diptimayee received severe burn injuries. Complainants son Sanjeeb and his brother -in -law Prasant rushed to the dining room to rescue the victims and in the process they also received burn injuries. The neighbours rushed to the spot and rescued them. All the above four persons were under treatment in the S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack as well as in the Private Hospital. The condition of Diptimayee became serious and she was shifted to Kalinga Hospital, Bhubaneshwar for better treatment. She however could not survive and ultimately succumbed to the burn injuries and died on 2.6.2001. Because of supply of defective LPG cylinder, the fire broke out which has not only resulted in the loss of human life but also destroyed household properties. On the above ground the complainant claims a total sum of Rs. 9,50,000 as compensation from the opposite parties.

(3.) THERE is no dispute that the complainant is a consumer of LPG with Consumer No. 2610. On 10.4.2001 a filled LPG cylinder was supplied to him on payment of price by the opposite party No. 1. One Prasant Kumar Swain a close relation of the complainant was removing the safety cap of the cylinder to connect the regulator. There was leakage of gas from the cylinder which seemed to have spread into different rooms of the house. As there was power failure at that time the family members were sitting in the dining room by lighting candles. Therefore, automatically the gas caught fire, as a result, the complainants daughter Diptimayee received burn injuries. Besides her the complainant also got burn injuries on his person. Annexure E is the certificate granted by the Assistant Fire Officer, Fire Station, Cuttack which goes to establish that there was outbreak of fire in the house of the complainant due to leakage of gas. The fire brigade reached the spot and extinguished the fire vide F.R. No. 145/01 dated 25.5.2001. From the above certificate there can be no doubt that there was leakage of gas from the gas cylinder resulting in outbreak of fire. Diptimayee, daughter of the complainant sustained severe burn injuries because of fire. She ultimately succumbed to the burn injuries which is evident from her post -mortem report. The complainant also sustained burn injuries which is evident from the certificate granted by the S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack. He was admitted in the hospital on 25.5.2001 (date of occurrence) and was discharged from the hospital on 13.6.2001. He had sustained 30% of burn injuries. Although in the complaint, the complainant has stated that Sanjeeb Kumar Nayak and Prasant Kumar Swain also received burn injuries, in absence of any medical report we are not inclined to accept the complainants version that these two persons also sustained burn injuries. The allegation of the complainant is that the LPG cylinder which was supplied to him was defective resulting in leakage of gas which led to outbreak of fire. In absence of any specific denial by the opposite parties, we hereby hold that the LPG cylinder supplied to the petitioner on 10.4.2001 was a defective one. There is thus deficiency in service by the opposite parties.