STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MADHYA PRADESH FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/23/A/14/1316 INDIAN OIL CORPN.

PRESENT ADDRESS - JABALPUR ,MADHYA PRADESH.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus SANGEETA YADAV PRESENT ADDRESS - JABALPUR ,MADHYA PRADESH.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV , PRESIDENT HON'BLE MRS. DR. MONIKA MALIK , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

INDIAN OIL CORPN.

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

SANGEETA YADAV DATED: 06/11/2025

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL FIRST APPEAL NO. 1316 OF 2014 (Arising out of order dated 10.09.2013 passed in C.C.No.386/2011 by District Commission, Jabalpur)

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED, THROUGH REGIONAL MANAGEMENT, CIVIC CENTRE, JABALPUR (M.P.) … APPELLANT.

Versus

1. SANGEETA YADAV, D/O LATE DEENDAYAL YADAV, R/O 240, BEHIND OLD CENTRAL BANK, GOHALPUR, JABALPUR (M.P.)

2. M/S SANDEEP GAS AGENCY, THROUGH MANAGER, BLOCK NO.13, SAMEEKSHA TOWN, KAANCH GHAR, JABALPUR (M.P.)

3. M/S OM INDANE GAS SERVICE, THROUGH MANAGER, NAGAR NIGAM OFFICE, CHUNGI NAKA, RANJHI, JABALPUR (M.P.) ... RESPONDENTS.

BEFORE :

HON’BLE JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV : PRESIDENT HON’BLE DR. MONIKA MALIK : MEMBER COUNSEL FOR PARTIES :

Shri R. K. Lokhande, learned counsel for the appellant.

None for the respondents.

O R D E R

(Passed On 06.11.2025)

Per Say Justice Sunita Yadav, President:

This appeal by the opposite party no.1/appellant arises out of the order dated 10.09.2013 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jabalpur (for short ‘District Commission) in C.C.No.386/2011 whereby the District Commission has allowed the complaint filed by the complainant/respondent no.1 against the opposite party no.1-Indian Oil Corporation and the opposite party no.3-M/S Om Indane Gas Service, Jabalpur.

2. Undisputed facts are that the opposite party no.1-Indian Oil Corporation appointed the opposite party no.2-dealer M/S Sandeep Gas Agency at Jabalpur from where the complainant had obtained a domestic LPG gas connection no.7114. Later for the said area, the opposite party no.1-IOL appointed the opposite party no.3-dealer M/S Om Indane Gas Service to which the gas connection of the complainant transferred at consumer no.420. It is submitted by the complainant that ill May-2006, supply of gas cylinder was continued, thereafter she remained outside from Jabalpur till 2010 and in the year 2011 when she returned back to Jabalpur she made a request to the opposite party no.3 to continue the supply of gas cylinder. It is alleged that despite giving affidavit as sought for and despite repeated requests, the opposite party no.3-distributor/dealer did not continue supply of gas cylinder. The complainant therefore alleging deficiency in service on part of opposite parties approached the District Commission seeking relief.

4. The opposite party no.-Indian Oil Corporation in its reply before the District Commission submitted that by suppressing the correct facts, the complainant has filed the present complaint. In fact, since last 10 years i.e. after marriage the complainant is residing at Narsinghpur and therefore supply of gas cylinder was not continued. There has been no deficiency in service on part of the opposite party. It was thus prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

5. The opposite party no.3-distributor/dealer in its reply before the District Commission submitted that the facts stated in the complaint are false. To continue the supply of gas cylinder, the complainant did not apply nor has given affidavit as required. In fact, after marriage the complainant is residing at Narsinghpur. The complaint is pre-mature and time barred. There has been no deficiency in service on part of the opposite party. It was thus prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs.

6. The District Commission allowed the complaint against the opposite party no.1 and 3 and direted them to continue supply of gas cylinder to the complainant on her consumer number 420. Compensation of Rs.7,000/- and costs of Rs.1,000