Skip to main content

Petrol pump to pay Rs 24K for filling petrol instead of diesel

The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has asked a petrol pump owner here to pay Rs 24,000 to a man for filling petrol instead of diesel in his car, causing damage to the engine.

The consumer commission comprising judicial member S A Siddiqui and member S C Jain passed the order while upholding a district consumer forum's order which had asked a Delhi-based petrol pump, Matta Automobiles, to pay Rs 24,000 to one Brij Mohan.

"...We do not find any justification for any interference (in forum's order) from our side with the result the appeal fails and is liable to be dismissed," the commission said, adding that forum's order was legally sound and should be maintained.

Mohan had told the commission that on June 26, 2007, the operator of the petrol pump had filled petrol instead of diesel in his car.

As a result, the car had to be repaired and he had to pay Rs 38,604 as bill.

Thereafter, Mohan filed a consumer complaint against the petrol pump. The petrol pump owner, however, denied the claim saying the complainant should himself have been vigilant.

The district forum in its order had held the petrol pump operator guilty of negligence and said that both the parties should bear the expenses incurred in repair of the car engine.

The forum thereafter decreed that the petrol pump owner should pay a sum of Rs 20,000 towards expenses of car engine repair besides Rs 3,000 as compensation and Rs 1000 as litigation cost.

Aggrieved by the forum's order, the petrol pump owner had approached the state consumer commission.

Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/petrol-pump-to-pay-rs-24k-for-filling-petrol-instead-of-diesel-114062400599_1.html

Comments

Most viewed this month

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...