State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Laxmi Devidas Mude vs Hingoli Gas Agency Hp Gasdealer on 11 January, 2023
1 FA/1233/2019
Date of filing : 16.07.2019
Date of order :11.01.2023
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE
REDRESSAL COMMISSION,MUMBAI, BENCH AT
AURANGABAD.
FIRST APPEAL NO. : 1233 OF 2019
IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 24 OF 2019
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : HINGOLI.
1. Laxmi s/o Devidas Mude,
R/o Sengaon, Current address- Galli no.9,
Pundlik Nagar, Garkheda, Aurangabad.
2. Ganesh Devidas Mude,
R/o As above.
3. Ashwini Devidas Mude,
R/o As above. APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. Hingoli Gas Agency, H.P. Gas dealer,
Through its Proprietor,
R/o Ajay Nagar, Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli.
2. Chief Manager (GS),
Solapur LPG R.O.
R/o Plot No. F-5, MIDC Chincholi, Solapur.
3. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company
R/o ICICI Lombard house, 414,
Veer Savarkar Marg, Near Siddhivinayak Temple,
Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400025 RESPONDENT No.1to3
CORAM :Smt.S.T.Barne, Hon'ble Presiding Judicial Member.
Mr.K.M.Lawande, Hon'ble Member.
2 FA/1233/2019
Present : Adv.P.P.Tapase for appellant,
Adv.R.B.Narwade Patil for respondent no.1.
Adv.D.S.Kulkarni for respondent no.2
Adv.R.H.Dahat for respondent no.3.
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 11/01/2023) Per Smt.S.T.Barne, Hon'ble Presiding Judicial Member.
1. The appellant Laxmi Devidas Mude, has filed appeal against order of District Consumer Commission below exh-1 passed on 13.5.2019 thereby rejecting the complaint in limine at the stage of admission. It is the case of complainant that deceased Devidas Mude was her husband and consumer of opponent no.1 gas agency. He was also employee of opponent no.1 for last 28 years. On 21.4.2017, the gas cylinder of deceased got empty. Hence, he was trying to plug the another cylinder which was available with him. Said gas cylinder was purchased for domestic use on 28.3.2017 when the deceased trying to check said cylinder, there was leakage and it suddenly caught with fire. In the said incident the complainants no.1&2 and their relatives sustained burns. Thereupon, deceased took the cylinder out of room to avoid blast of cylinder, but due to blast of cylinder deceased sustained 71 % burns and during treatment he died on 27th April, 2018. The incident occurred due to defective supply of gas cylinder by opponent no.1. However, on seeing critical condition of deceased, the opponent no.1 in collusion with police registered fake crime against the deceased with fake allegation that the deceased was doing black marketing by taking out gas from LPG gas cylinder. Police inspector visited the spot at 9.30 Hrs. on 21.04.2017, however, filed imaginary FIR on next day at 3.00 a.m. 3 FA/1233/2019 and drawn panchanama at 7.00 to 8.00 pm and also recorded false statement of complainants no.2&3. Complainant no.2 is minor. Police recorded the statement of witness concerned, and made them to put their signature on statement.
2. The opponent no.2 also not made proper investigation or drawn spot panchanama immediately. The complainant requested to police to registrar the FIR, but they have registered false complaint against the deceased. However, they did not help the complainant. The opponent no.2 also failed to co-operate the complainants. Hence, the complainants have issued notice to opponent no.1to3. They avoided to give reply to complaint. Hence, complainant has filed consumer complaint before District Consumer Commission.
3. The District Consumer Commission at the stage of admission refused to admit the consumer complaint on the ground that, the offence is registered against the deceased u/sec 3 & 7 of essential commodities Act & sec. 338, 304 of IPC and that the complainant failed to produce documents prima facie to establish that deceased was consumer of opponent no.1 and dismissed the complaint. It reveals that, since long matter was pending on deciding delay condonation application. Hence, this Commission decided application for condonation of delay on the basis of record. On 15.12.2021, and thereafter time and again the matter was adjourned for hearing before admission. However, the Advocates of appellant and appellant remained absent till this date. On 02.12.2022, this Commission has specifically noted in roznama that the matter is adjourned as last chance for hearing before admission, else necessary 4 FA/1233/2019 order will be passed on the basis of record. Today, also Advocate and appellant absent.
4. Today, Adv. Narwade Patil for appellant and Adv. D.S.Kulkarni for respondent no.2 are absent. Advocate for respondent no.3 insurance company Shri.R.H.Dahat present. Hence, heard him on admission of appeal. It is brought to notice of this Commission that in this case, the FIR case came be registered against deceased as he was dealing with illegal business of refilling the gas and distributing it from commercial and domestic cylinders. Accordingly, it is mentioned in page no.44 of appeal compilation. There found in the interior room below the cot about 2 big cylinders (of commercial use) & 7 cylinders of domestic use and 3 small cylinders and it is mentioned that while refilling the cylinder due to leakage of gas, it has caught with fire. And in that incident deceased sustained 70 % burns and died during treatment. Complainant and other family members also sustained burn injuries.
5. Accordingly spot panchanama made on page 37 and 40 of appeal memo and found refilling instrument at the residence of deceased specifically mentioned there found one scale (वजनकाटा) of Salter Max Company wherein it is mentioned that, 50 kg- 250 kg measured and mentioned in HP gas. Therefore, spanner required for refilling also found and the spanner which are useful for nuts and bolt of gas cylinder. And the chain useful for weighing gas cylinder also found. Police have made investigation by recording statement of witnessed including family members of deceased and concluded that the deceased was involved in illegal activities of gas refilling and 5 FA/1233/2019 distribution unauthorisedly. Therefore, crime u/sec. 3 & 7 of Essential Commodity Act, 338 CPC came to be registered against deceased. It reveals that deceased sustained with 70 % burn injuries and other relatives were also injured in the incident. During the treatment deceased died on 27.04.2017.
6. It reveals from record that complainants have made grievance to police and Human Rights Commission and alleged that opponent no.1&2 in collusion with police, have made false allegations against deceased to save opponent no.1, and false FIR is registered against the deceased. In fact the deceased is consumer of opponent no.1 and was also employee of opponent no.1 for 28 years. And for that he produced one Xerox copy of card of domestic gas connection showing that deceased was consumer of opponent no.1. After going through consumer complainant, it reveals that, complainant claiming that he has genuine case against opponent no.1&2. However, opponent no.1&2 in collusion with police have made false panchanama and allegation and registered false crime. It is to be noted that consumer Forum are deciding the case summarily on prima facie documents and affidavit in support of it. When the document more particularly FIR, spot panchanama and investigation is disputed, the complainant ought to have approached to Civil Court/Criminal Court to prove her allegation by adducing evidence.
7. The District Consumer Commission rightly observed at the stage of admission by perusing the document produced by the complainant herself that offence came to be registered against deceased husband of complainant leading as he was with refilling of 6 FA/1233/2019 gas unauthorisedly, and beyond the use of domestic cylinder. There found commercial and small cylinder along with the gas refilling instruments, spanner and weighing scale which itself is prima facie to show that, police found supporting material during investigation. Therefore, to challenge the investigation made by police or to prove that FIR false, the complainant is required to approach to appropriate Court. Therefore, with the afore said discussion and observation, we are of the opinion, that there requires no interference in the judgment and order of District Consumer Commission and no propriety in entertaining this appeal and to keep matter pending. Hence, appeal is deserves to be dismissed at the sage of admission. Hence, the order.
ORDER
1. Appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission.
2. No order as to costs.
Mr.K.M.Lawande Smt.S.T.Barne, Member Presiding Judicial Member UNK