Punjab

Faridkot

CC/16/90

Jagtar Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Municipal Council - Opp.Party(s)

Kuldeep Singh Mittal

16 May 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No. :       90

Date of Institution:   01.04.2016

Date of Decision :    16.05.2016

Jagtar Singh s/o Jugraj Singh r/o House No. B-XII/67, Near Harindra Nagar, Faridkot Tehsil & District Faridkot.

...Complainant

Versus

1. Municipal Council, Faridkot through its President.

2. Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Faridkot.

                                                                     ....OPs

    

   Complaint under Section 12 of the

   Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

    

   Quorum:     Sh Ajit Aggarwal, President,

   Smt Parampal Kaur, Member,

   Sh P Singla, Member.

    

   Present:      Sh Amit Mittal, Ld Counsel for complainant,    

                     OPs Exparte.

    

    (Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                 Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Ops and for seeking directions to OPs to correct the house number of complainant and to pay Rs 2,50,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service, for mental agony and harassment to complainant besides Rs 11,000/-as litigation expenses.

   2                                     Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant Municipal Council, Faridkot allotted House No. B-XII/67 to the house of complainant for the purpose of house tax and even the number plate issued by Municipal Counsel, Faridkot was duly affixed by authorized person of Municipal Council on the door of complainant bears same number. Complainant has provided this number to various authorities like Water Supply & Sanitation Department, Banks, District Bar Association, Faridkot, for Registration Certificate of car and others and even Adhaar Card issued to complainant bears the same number. Moreover, complainant is used to deposit his property tax with Municipal Council, Faridkot on same house number. It is submitted that complainant was in need of House Tax Assessment Register regarding entry of house of complainant and complainant approached Ops to get the same, but he was surprised to see that entry B-XII/67 has been recorded in the name of one Chand Kaur w/o Bhag Singh. Complainant made several requests to Ops to correct the said entry as he has given the same address to many authorities, but Ops did not pay any heed to listen to his request. Complainant is an old age person and it is very difficult for him to visit the office of Ops again and again and this has caused great harassment and mental agony to him. This act of Ops amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OPs and he has prayed for compensation to the tune of Rs 50,000/- besides main relief. Hence, the complaint.

   3                                          The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 8.04.2016, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

4                                                                Notice containing copy of complaint was issued to OPs through Process Server  and summons were duly got served to Ops on 20.04.2016, but despite repeated calls Ops did not appear in the Forum either in person or through counsel to defend the allegations levelled against them and thereafter a long waiting till 4.00 O clock, when Ops did not appear in the Forum on date fixed, they were proceeded against exparte vide order dt 4.05.2016.

5                                          In Exparte evidence, ld counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant as Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to C-15 and then, closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

6                                                         Ld Counsel for complainant vehementally argued that Ops allotted House No. B-XII/67 to the house of complainant for the purpose of house tax and even the number plate issued by Municipal Counsel, Faridkot was duly affixed by authorized person of Municipal Council on the door of complainant bears same number. Complainant has provided this number to various authorities like Water Supply & Sanitation Department, Banks, District Bar Association, Faridkot, for Registration Certificate of car and others and even Adhaar Card issued to complainant bears the same number. It is  submitted that complainant is used to deposit his property tax with Municipal Council, Faridkot on same house number. It is contended that complainant was in need of House Tax Assessment Register regarding entry of his house and for this purpose, he approached Ops to get the same, but he was surprised to see that entry B-XII/67 has been recorded in the name of one Chand Kaur w/o Bhag Singh. Meaning thereby, same number is allotted to some one else. Complainant made several requests to Ops to correct the said entry as he has given the said number in address to various authorities, but Ops did not pay heed to his request. It is further contended that due to old age, it is very difficult for complainant to visit the office of Ops repeatedly. Ld counsel for complainant has stressed on documents Ex C-1 to 15 and has also prayed for accepting the present complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses.

7                                      In the absence of any  rebuttal, we have heard the ld counsel for complainant and have carefully gone through and perused the evidence and documents placed on record.

8                                       Careful perusal of documents Ex C-2 and C-3, which are photographs clearly show the name plate issued by Ops to him. It proves the contention of complainant that he is allotted the number in dispute to him. Ex C-4 is the copy of legal notice, it explains the grievance of complainant and it also tries to show the efforts made by him to get correct the number issued to him. Documents Ex C-7 to C-14 further justify the plea of complainant that he has given this house number to various authorities as proof of his residential address. Ex C-15 is the  copy of folio of register of Ops which clears the main contention of complainant that house number allotted to him is further allotted to one Chand Kaur wife of Bhag Singh. Complainant has placed on record sufficient evidence to prove his case. On the contrary, Ops did not appear in the Forum to plead anything in rebuttal. On the other hand, evidence produced by complainant is cogent and authenticity of documents Ex C-2 to C-15 placed on record can not be ignored and it proves the deficiency on the part of OPs.

9                                           We are fully convinced with the arguments and case law produced by ld counsel for complainant. Complainant has proved his case and therefore, complaint in hand is hereby allowed. Ops are directed to correct the number of the house of complainant and to pay Rs.3,000/-as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him. Ops are further directed to pay Rs.1,500/-to complainant as litigation expenses. Compliance of this order be made within one month of the receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of costs as per law. File be consigned to record room.

 Announced in open Forum:

Dated:16.05.2016                      

Member                  Member             President               (Parampal Kaur)           (P Singla)            (Ajit Aggarwal)