THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE. (ADDL. BENCH)

DATED THIS THE 12^th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

APPEAL NO.300/2022

PRESENT

SRI RAVI SHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

SMT. SUNITA C.BAGEWADI, MEMBER

Adithya Fuel Station,

(Indian Oil Corporation Ltd)

By its Proprietor,                                                … Appellant/s

P.Vishwanath S/o K.Puttaswamy,

Aged about 72 years,

K R S Road, Gokulam,

4^th Stage, Opp. Anjaneya Temple,

Mysuru- 570 020

(By Sri.V.V.Gunjal, Advocate)

V/s

K.S.Mahadevappa,

S/o Subbaiah Gowda,                                        … Respondent/s

Aged about 62 years,

No.1204, Bellavatta village,

RBI Post, Mysore-570003

 (By Sri.S.Chandra, Advocate)

O R D E R

BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

The Opposite Party in complaint No.287/2018 has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the District Consumer Commission, Mysore which directed them to pay excess amount collected for one liter petrol and Rs.2000-00 towards unfair trade practice and Rs.2000-00 towards litigation expenses with interest @ 8% per annum and submits that on 11-6-2018 the complainant filled the petrol to his Motor Bike-Honda Dream Yuga (CB-110 ME) BS-III bearing Reg. No.KA-09-HA-0872 full tank petrol and after filing the petrol, this appellant has issued a bill for Rs. 697.77. There afterwards, he noticed that, this Opposite Party has collected excess amount for one liter as capacity of the petrol tank of his bike is only eight liters whereas the Opposite Party have issued bill for Rs.697.77 towards nine liters, in fact they have not filled nine liters to tank of the bike hence submits the Opposite Party rendered unfair trade practice and filed a complaint before the District Consumer Commission. After appearance, this appellant took a contention that, though the capacity is eight liters, the nine liters of petrol was filled into tank as per the filling they have generated the bill to the nine liters and issued, hence submits there is no unfair trade practice.  After trial, the District Consumer Commission allowed a complaint and directed the Opposite Parties to pay the above said amount hence, appellant before this Commission.

2. The learned advocate for appellant vehemently argued that, as per the instruction given by the complainant/ respondent only they filled full tank petrol on 11-6-2018, when the tank was filled nine liters, this appellant has generated bill for nine liters and received the said amount. Though tank capacity is eight liters only, the tank received additional one liter practically. The complainant has not produced any material before the District Consumer Commission from the department of Weights and Measures to justify the fuel capacity of the tank is only eight liters and further submits that, the system of calibration are fully digitalized and even if the petrol bunk people or the officers want to check the dispenser, they have to report the presence of the department and the Indian Oil Corporation who shares an OTP number then only after that all the tests and examinations are conducted as per the manual, there is no any discrepancy in the dispenser, the bill was generated as per the petrol dispens