The District Co-operative Registrar Near D.R.D.A Office ,Khammam ,Bhurahanpuram,Khammam (T&D). President the Khammam District TNGo's Housing Co-operative society Ltd., Rep by its Sri. Kurapati Rangaraju ,O/o. District Collectorate Complex ,Khammam. Secretary The Khammam District TNGO's Housing Building Co-operative Society Ltd., rep by its K.S.K.C Prasad,O/o. District Collectorate Complex ,Khammam.
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM AT KHAMMAM Dated this, the 22nd day of October, 2010 CORAM: 1. Sri Vijay Kumar, B.Com., LL.B., President 2. Smt. V. Vijaya Rekha, B.Sc. B.L., Member 3. Sri.R.Kiran Kumar, B.Sc., LL.B., Member C.C.No.22 of 2010 Between: M. Kesava Rao, S/o Venkatacharyulu, Age:64years, Retired employees, R/o Sathupally Town & Mandal, Khammam District. Complainant And 1) President, The Khammam District TNGOs Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., rep. by its Sri Kurapati Rangaraju, O/o District Collectorate Complex, Khammam Town & District. 2) Secretary, The Khammam District TNGOs Housing Building Co- operative Society Ltd., rep. by its K.S.K.C. Prasad, O/o District collectorate Complex, Khammam Town & District. 3) The District Co-operative Registrar, Near: D.R.D.A Office, Khammam, Bhurahanpuram, Khammam Town & District. Opposite parties. This C.C. is coming on before this Forum for final hearing in the presence of Sri.K.Rajasekhar Reddy, Advocate for complainant and of Sri. I. Venkateswarlu, Advocate for opposite party No.1; Notice of opposite party No.2 served and called absent; Opposite party No.3 appeared in person; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing the arguments, and having stood over for consideration, till this day, this Forum passed the following:- ORDER (Per Sri.Vijay Kumar, President) This complaint is filed u/s.12-A of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The averments made in the complaint are that the complainant is a retired employee in the Government Junior College at Sathupalli and he is a member of Khammam District TNGOs Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., Khammam from the formation of society 1986. The opposite parties No.1 and 2/President and Secretary of District TNGOs Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., Khammam unit formed a society for the welfare of TNGOs and also formed byelaws, having registered under Societies Act in opposite party No.3 for the welfare of TNGOs society members, through registered No.460 TE and opposite party No.3 issued registration certificate in favour of opposite party Nos.1 and 2 society for some conditions as per bye-laws. The complainant had enrolled his name as a member in society and paid Rs.126/- towards membership fee vide receipt No.559, dt.15-7-1986, at that time he was working as a Record Assistant in Government Junior College at Sathupalli, subsequently he paid Rs.1500/- for allotment of house site plot cost vide cash receipt No.994. In the cash receipt it is mentioned that this amount is paid towards cost of plot in Velugumatla area. Thereafter on 23-2-1987 sri.B.Swamynadham, President, TNGOs Central Union, Hyderabad performed a lottery for allotment of plot, wherein the complainant got prized and succeeded for the plot No.94 to an extent of 300 square yards and opposite parties No.1 and 2 had issued an allotment order vide Sl.No.249, after that the complainant fulfilled all the conditions. Having complied with all the formalities, the complainant approached the opposite parties No.1 and 2 to execute the registered sale deed, but they went on evading to execute the registered sale deed under one pretext or the other. Having believed the versions of the opposite parties, waited all the time, even then the opposite parties No.1 and 2 did not execute the registered sale deed in favour of the complainant. The other persons in whose favour some plots were allotted, the opposite parties have executed the registered sale deed in their favour. Some of the sites were vacant along with the site of the complainant. On 13-2-2010 the complainant got issued a registered legal notice to the opposite parties and the same was received by opposite party No.2 on 16-2-2010. Opposite party No.1 refused to receive the notice. Hence this complaint to direct the opposite parties No.1 and 2 to execute the registered sale deed in respect of plot No.94 to an extent of 300 square yards in favour of the complainant, Rs.50,000/- as compensation for deficiency of service and Rs.10,000/- towards costs of the litigation. Apart from the complaint, the complainant filed an affidavit, reiterating the contents of the complaint. On receipt of the notice, opposite party No.1 appeared through his counsel and filed counter. In the counter all the averments made in the complaint are denied in toto. It is further submitted that the opposite parties No.1 and 2 are nothing to do with the society and the said society was wound up long back and the entire records are with the District Registrar Co-operatives, Khammam. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party Nos. 1 and 2. It is further submitted that the complainant has to approach the civil court under Specific Relief Act to get a registered sale deed in his favour under specific performance of contract. This complaint is barred by limitation. The complainant could not seek relief without adding Khammam District Non-Gazetted Officers Co-operative Housing Society as a party. The complainant has to file a petition under section 23 of Public Societies Act before the District Court, Khammam. This complaint is not maintainable. As per the report of Divisional Co-operative Officer, Khammam that the TNGOs H.B.C. society became defunct from 1986 onwards. Therefore, opposite parties No.1 and 2 are nothing to do with the HBC society and prayed to dismiss the complaint. On behalf of the opposite party No.3, a separate counter is filed, wherein all the averments made in the complaint denied in toto. It is further submitted that the allotment of plot to the complainant is under process and it will be allotted to him after completion of survey by the concerned department authorities. Under A.P. Co-operative Societies Act 1964, the District Co-operative Registrar, Khammam is the general supervising authority in the district. This dispute is between a primary member and a co-operative House Building Society. The district Co-operative Officer is no way concerned and it is to be settled by the society. Any dispute in between member and co-operative society has to be appealed before the Co-operative Tribunal, Warangal, under section 76 (1) of the APCS Act, 1964. The president, Khammam District, TNGOs House Building Co-operative Society Ltd., Khammam has also been directed to compulsory action for registering the plot in favour of the complainant vide its letter RC No.336/2010-B, dated 03.05.2010 and prayed to dismiss the complaint. On behalf of the complainant, the following documents have filed. Ex.A.1 - Attested copy of Membership fee receipt vide No.559, dt.15-7-1986. Ex.A.2 - Attested copy of payment of allotment plot vide receipt No.994, an amount of Rs.1500/-. Ex.A.3 - Attested copy of allotment order issued by opposite parties No.1 and 2, in favour of the complainant. Ex.A.4 - office copy of legal notice Ex.A.5 - Return rejected notices & served acknowledgments Ex.A.6 - Reply notice from opposite party No.3 Ex.A.7 - Attested copy of Printed calender in Khammam District association committee. The case underwent a number of adjournments, yet either party failed to file written arguments and oral arguments. There was no representation from either side. Hence, treated the matter as heard from both sides. Perused the material filed therein. Upon which the points that arose for consideration are, 1. Whether the complainant is entitled to ask for execution of registered sale deed in his favour in respect of plot allotted to him? 2. To what relief? Point No.1: As per Ex.A.1, the complainant successfully proved that he is a member of Khammam TNGOs Housing Cooperative and as per Ex.A.2 the complainant also successfully established that the plot was allotted to him in plot No.94 to an extent of 300 square yards in Velugumatla village. He also successfully proved that he paid an amount of Rs.1500/-. He also refers to Ex.A.3, dt.23-2-1987, which is original allotment order, wherein a plot to an extent of 300 square yards is allotted to him in the hands of the then President, B.Swaminatham, President, TNGOS Central Union, Hyderabad. This Ex.A.3 contains a rough sketch of the plot allotted to the complainant in Velugumatla revenue village. Even after passing of 25 years, opposite parties No.1 and 2 did not show any interest in executing the registered sale deed in favour of the complainant in respect of plot allotted to him. Having vexed with the attitude of the opposite parties No.1 and 2, the complainant got issued a legal notice as in Ex.A.4. The same was refused by opposite parties No.1 and 2, but it was acknowledged by opposite party No.3. The complainant also refers to Ex.A.5, which is printed calender of Khammam District Association committee wherein the names of opposite parties No.1 and 2 described as President and Secretary of Cooperative societies on the face of Ex.A.5. The complainant has substantially proved that he is a member of District TNGOs cooperative society, Khammam and he enrolled as member of the society and became a member vide receipt No.559 and he enrolled his name as a member and paid Rs.1500/- vide receipt No.994 towards costs of the plot. He also successfully proved that the then President, Swaminatham performed lottery, wherein he got a plot bearing No.94 to an extent of 300 square yards and got allotment order. Having complied with all the formalities, the opposite parties Nos.1 and 2 did not evince any interest in executing the registered sale deed in favour of the complainant. Hence, the complaint is fit to be allowed. Point No.2:- In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the opposite parties No.1 and 2 to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the complainant in respect of plot No.94 to an extent of 300 square yards situated in Velugumatla Revenue village, Khammam District, within a period of months from the date of passing of this order. So far as the complaint against opposite party No.3 is concerned, it is dismissed as opposite party No.3 is a formal party. There is no order as to costs and compensation. Dictated to the steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum on this the 22nd day of October, 2010. PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM, KHAMMAM APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE Witnesses examined on behalf of complainant: None Witnesses examined on behalf of opposite parties: None Exhibits marked on behalf of complainant: Ex.A.1 - Attested copy of Membership fee receipt vide No.559, dt.15-7-1986. Ex.A.2 - Attested copy of payment of allotment plot vide receipt No.994, an amount of Rs.1500/-. Ex.A.3 - Attested copy of allotment order issued by opposite parties No.1 and 2, in favour of the complainant. Ex.A.4 - office copy of legal notice Ex.A.5 - Return rejected notices & served acknowledgments Ex.A.6 - Reply notice from opposite party No.3 Ex.A.7 - Attested copy of Printed calendar in Khammam District association committee. Exhibits marked for opposite parties: - Nil - PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM, KHAMMAM
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
