Chandigarh petrol pump to shell out ₹10,000 for harassing transporter
The petrol pump in question is managed by the Chandigarh Industrial and Tourism Development Corporation Limited (CITCO)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-2 has directed a petrol pump in Hallomajra to pay ₹10,000 in compensation to a truck driver for causing harassment while collecting payment for fuel in November 2021.
The petrol pump in question is managed by the Chandigarh Industrial and Tourism Development Corporation Limited (CITCO).
The complainant, Vinod Kumar of Zirakpur, took the CITCO managing director and the petrol pump manager to court, submitting that he ran a transportation business and held an “Xtrapower Fleet Card” for fuel payments, issued by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (IOCL).
On November 27, 2021, he received an order to deliver goods from Lalru, Punjab, to Maharashtra within a tight deadline of 36 hours.
His trucks, carrying the goods, stopped at the Hallomajra petrol pump for diesel around 9.47 pm.
After confirmation from the attendant that they accepted the Xtrapower Fleet Card, which had ₹50,000 loaded, the trucks were refuelled with 540 litres of diesel worth ₹43,904.
But the attendant later refused payment through the card, and insisted on cash or UPI. Despite multiple calls to senior officials, Vinod was unable to resolve the issue. The staff also threatened to remove the fuel from the trucks if payment wasn’t made in another form by morning.
Keeping in view the scheduled delivery, the complainant through his friend transferred the total amount via Google Pay. In this process, he alleged that the opposite parties wasted around five hours of the complainant and sent them legal notice.
CITCO MD, petrol pump manager deny deficiency in service
In their replies, the petrol pump manager and CITCO MD admitted that the Xtra Power Fleet Card was a form of a prepaid card issued by IOCL and it worked on a separate machine provided by IOCL.
Despite repeated tries, payment from the card could not be made, as there was no network in the card machine.
Thus, the driver and owner of the vehicles were requested to make the payment through any other card or any other mode. Initially they refused and after much persuasion, they finally paid through Google Pay.
In this process a delay of about two and a half hours occurred, which was attributable to the complainant only as he refused to make the payment through alternative means, they contended, praying for dismissal of the complaint while denying any deficiency in service.
At its end, IOCL averred that they had entered into a supplementary dealership agreement for fleet card programme with the petrol pump as per which all liability, if any, lied with CITCO.
Commission questions absence of network for long period
Acknowledging the harassment caused to the complainant, the commission observed that the petrol pump failed to justify why there was no network for such a long period.
“Things would have been different had the alleged network issue been there for only 10-20 minutes,” they added, but also observed that the OPs had no liability regarding the complainant’s failure to deliver the consignment within 36 hours.
“The card in question was taken by the complainant for his ease and convenience and not to cause undue harassment to him for such a long time at such an unearthly hour,” the commission added.
Terming this amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practices, the commissioner directed the petrol pump manager and CITCO MD to pay a lump sum compensation of ₹10,000 to the complainant for the harassment.