<p>B R Leelavathi, a resident of Kuvempunagar extension had got a connection from Teradal Gas distributors. After the gas was empty, she tried to get a new cyinder fixed. Soon she found that she could not fix the regulator to the new cylinder because the cylinder did not have a valve. Within no time the damaged cylinder blasted causing huge damage. <br /><br />Leelavathi sent a request to the gas distributors seeking compensation for the loss. This yielded no results. Finally, the customer approached the consumer court.<br /><br />The gas distributors and gas company representatives at the court presented the arguement that the blast had happened due to neglegence of the customer while changing the regulator. They said that the customer had meddled with the regulator in an enclosed room, which led to the mishap. “The company has provided a cylinder after testing it twice. <br /><br />The cylinder was tested by the company employee in front of the customer once. The consumer has filed a complaint to gain benefit. We are not entitled to pay the compensation,” said the company representatives.<br /><br />Consumer Court President Ravishankar, Member H S Rudrappa and K K Pushpalatha heard the argument of the complainant and the defendent and cross checked the documents submitted by both. The bench came to the conclusion that the company had failed to supply good cylinder to the consumer. <br /><br />The bench ordered the company that it is liable to pay to the customer Rs 80,000 for house repair, Rs 50,000 compensation and Rs 2,000 for case expenditure. The amount has to be paid to the consumer within one month failing which they will have to pay the amount with 9 per cent interest.<br /><br /></p>
<p>B R Leelavathi, a resident of Kuvempunagar extension had got a connection from Teradal Gas distributors. After the gas was empty, she tried to get a new cyinder fixed. Soon she found that she could not fix the regulator to the new cylinder because the cylinder did not have a valve. Within no time the damaged cylinder blasted causing huge damage. <br /><br />Leelavathi sent a request to the gas distributors seeking compensation for the loss. This yielded no results. Finally, the customer approached the consumer court.<br /><br />The gas distributors and gas company representatives at the court presented the arguement that the blast had happened due to neglegence of the customer while changing the regulator. They said that the customer had meddled with the regulator in an enclosed room, which led to the mishap. “The company has provided a cylinder after testing it twice. <br /><br />The cylinder was tested by the company employee in front of the customer once. The consumer has filed a complaint to gain benefit. We are not entitled to pay the compensation,” said the company representatives.<br /><br />Consumer Court President Ravishankar, Member H S Rudrappa and K K Pushpalatha heard the argument of the complainant and the defendent and cross checked the documents submitted by both. The bench came to the conclusion that the company had failed to supply good cylinder to the consumer. <br /><br />The bench ordered the company that it is liable to pay to the customer Rs 80,000 for house repair, Rs 50,000 compensation and Rs 2,000 for case expenditure. The amount has to be paid to the consumer within one month failing which they will have to pay the amount with 9 per cent interest.<br /><br /></p>
