COMPLAINT ABOUT FAULTY SERVICES
1. The case is at the stage of ex-parte arguments which have been heard and the file of the present case has been perused in the light of ex-parte arguments as such I proceed to dispose off the complaint by discussion in the following paragraphs.
2. Briefly stated the version of the claimant is to the effect that sui gas connection installed at his residence in the name of his mother bearing reference No.43236400008, meter No.MG 22118342 was removed without notice by disconnection of the supply of gas in January 2011 but the same was installed on the next day on showing the latest bill; that no further bill is being issued despite rounds taken by the claimant at the concerned office; that bribe is being demanded for issuance of the bill; that the bill should be issued immediately and Rs.400000/- should be paid to the claimant as damages for mental tension being a practicing lawyer.
3. The defendants have absented themselves after appearance of Mohammad Saleem Khan billing officer on 26-09-2011 and Sajjad Hussain officer on 27-10-2011 as such there is no version of the defendants on the record.
4. The claimant was directed to prove the version by production of ex parte evidence with reference to Rule 14 of PCP Rules 2009.
5. The ex-parte evidence of the claimant consists of original affidavit of the claimant as Ex.P-1; three original postal receipts as Ex.P-2 to Ex.P-4; copy of CNIC of the claimant as Mark P.A; copy of legal notice as Mark P.B; copy of sui gas bill relating to the month of October 2010 as Mark P.C; copy of sui gas bill relating to the month of September 2011as Mark P.D.
6. It is necessary to be pointed out that the rights of the consumers have been limited by providing the restrictions on the grant of damages / compensation by Ss.10 & 15 while liability of the defendants is limited by Ss.4 & 13. To comprehend the concept about restrictions on grant of damages properly, it is necessary to ponder about Ss.4 & 10 jointly when the case is about defective products and Ss.13 & 15 jointly when the case is about faulty or defective services.
7. It is pertinent to note that the grant of damages is curtailed even under the Contract Act, 1872 being the law of the land in which it is provided in S.73 to 75 that the damages should be proportionate to the loss and not excessive by mentioning that such compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract is not to be given for any remote and indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach. It is an embargo placed by the general law of contracts upon the powers of the courts about grant of damages.
8. It is also observed that further embargo on the quantum of damages to be awarded by the consumers courts has been placed by the law provided in S. 4, 10, 13 & 15 of PCP Act by declaring that the manufacturer or service provider shall be liable to a consumer for damages proximately caused by anticipated use of the product or provision of services that have caused damage but he shall not be liable for any damages except a return of the consideration or a part thereof and the costs in such cases where the consumer has not suffered any damages from the provision of service except lack of benefit or loss of utility.
9. I have observed from a perusal of the file that since the jurisdiction of this court for the grant of damages is very limited and since the supply of sui gas was disconnected by removal of meter from the premises of the claimant without any justification and since the same was restored on the very next day as such the claimant is entitled to recover the damages for one day only which is hereby fixed at Rs.10000/-.
10. As far as the 2nd grievance of the claimant is concerned about non issuance of further bills, it is observed that since the copy of the bill of September 2011 has been produced in the present file as Mark PD while the present complaint was filed on 12-09-2011 therefore it is revealed that at least one further bill relating to the same month in which the complaint was filed has been issued during the period of grievance therefore no further damages are required to be imposed about non issuance of further bills and the complaint can be disposed off by issuance of the direction about issuance of regular bills.
11. It is clarified that if the defendants would apply for cancellation of this order by filing the application for setting aside ex-parte order, for taking the benefit of ex-parte nature of the order then the whole claim would be deemed to have been restored including the part of claim which is not being granted presently, while the possibility for the grant of the remaining relief would be considered on its own merits alongwith possibility of the refusal to grant even the relief being granted in these ex-parte proceedings during the fresh proceedings either after recording the evidence or in summary manner whichever method would be acceptable to the parties for proceeding further with the present case during fresh round of litigation, but not otherwise in accordance with law. The right of the defendants is however reserved with reference to Rule 14 of PCP Rules 2009 to move the application for cancellation / modification to be filed within one month failing which the right for seeking cancellation / modification would be deemed to have been forfeited in accordance with law.
12. In accordance with above discussion, the complaint is hereby accepted partly in ex-parte manner to the extent of the direction about issuance of future bills regularly and for recovery of Rs.10000/- as damages while the remaining relief is with-held.
13. This order would become final u/s 34 of PCP Act 2005, if the appeal is not preferred within period of 30 days under S.33 of PCP Act 2005 & Rule 18 of PCP Rules 2009 in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of Honourable High Court or if the application for cancellation of this order is not filed in the given period.
14. The claimant is entitled to get the order implemented by filing the application for implementation with reference to S.31, 32 & 36 of PCP Act, 2005, if so required, with the warning to the defendants that the costs to be incurred for and during the application for implementation would be liable to be recovered from them.
15. A copy of this order is directed to be made available for publishing on the internet to the website of Punjab Consumer Protection Council Secretariat, 135-J, Model Town, Lahore for public disclosure and easy access of information to the consumers relating to the products and services in accordance with Rule 25 of PCP Rules, 2009.
16. The file of this complaint is to be consigned to the record room of this court duly page marked with proper index and after due completion and made available for issuance of attested copies and kept under safe custody till the period fixed for destruction in accordance with the Rules & Orders of Honourable Lahore High Court.