D.O.F:16/11/2021
D.O.O:15/12/2022
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.No.207/2021
Dated this, the 15th day of December 2022
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
P.Raghava Poduval, aged 74 years,
S/o late V.Ambu Poduval
‘Prasadam’, Kanam Road, Balla, : Complainant
Balla village, P.O. Balla
(Adv:- Sidharth Nambiar)
And
Shiju. Y. Das
The Village Officer,
Balla, Balla Village, : Opposite Party
P.O. Balla.
ORDER
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
Facts of the case in brief is as follows :
Complainant says that he is the owner of landed property in R.S.No.252/1- 1.03 acres in Balla Village, Hosdurg Taluk. He applied for issue of possession certificate with the opposite party. He paid Rs.25/- on 26/06/2021. But opposite party did not issue the possession certificate even after seven days. Complainant sent lawyer notice dated 22/09/2021. He filed objection before Tahasildar dated 05/07/2021 narrated strongly worded grievance of non-issue of possession certificate and resultant difficulties even for availing loan. Complainant sought relief expediting issue of possession certificate back and compensation of Rs.50000/-
2. The Opposite party filed its written version raising a contention that property was subject to survey measurement and on completion opposite party advised to re-apply through E-district portal but complainant did not co-operate with survey measurement nor applied through the E-district processing and hence possession certificate is not issued and thus there is no Deficiency in service and complaint to be dismissed.
3. Complainant filed chief affidavit marked documents Ext A1 application for issue of Possession certificate, copy of two letters, Ext A2 and A3, possession certificate of 2020 marked as Ext A4 copy of appeal preferred to District collector marked Ext A5 and A6, Copy of lawyer notice Ext A7 and is marked as A8.
As per rival contentions following points arise for consideration the case-
- Whether there is any Deficiency in Service and negligence in the matter of non-issue of possession certificate to the complainant.
- Whether Complainant is entitled to any compensation and if so for what reliefs?
5. The complainant states that he is the absolute owner having tittle and possession of property of 1.03 acres in Balla village, Resurvey No.252/1 in Hosdurg Taluk. In order to substantiate the same, the petitioner produced Ext A1 Possession Certificate of its previous year. According to the petitioner, application was filed before the opposite party for issuance of Possession Certificate. His grievance is that his request was rejected without any valid reason.
6. The only reason stated for non-issue of possession certificate is the pendency of survey measurement. Later survey is completed but insists for fresh application and connected documents of other issues of cutting of trees etc.
7. The evidence consisted of the proof affidavit filed by the complainant and Ext A1 and A8 in his side. The opposite party did not cross examine complainant nor adduced oral evidence.
8. Complainant applied for the certificate for getting loan benefits from bank. It is further submitted by him that even after giving a complaint to the Sub-Collector and District Collector no relief is granted. Opposite party was very particular that only after giving a fresh application possession certificate will be issued.
9. The decision of Honorable High court of Kerala in Trissur Municipal corporation Vs Ummar Koya Haji (2006)(3)KLT 897. It is stated that in a case like issuance of Possession Certificate, encumbrance certificate, mutation certificate etc. the same will definitely be amenable to the jurisdiction of the consumer Protection Act. It is also to be found that for obtaining such certificates the applicant paid fees.
10. In Navin Raju Vs S.Basheer (3) KLJ 1977, Pendency of a suit is no ground to refuse the application filed by the petitioner for issuance of revenue records A5 is evident from Ext. A1, mutation has been effected in the name of the complainant and he has been remitting tax in respect of the property during and up to 2020.
11. Complainant paid Rs.25/- as fees for providing service by issue of Possession Certificate but not issued for one reason or other. There is nothing to dis believe the evidence of complainant in this regard. Thus there is Deficiency in Service of Opposite Party in the matter. Therefore complainant is entitled to compensation Opposite Party is liable to pay compensation and cost to the petition. We also referred the citation in Joint Registrar Vs TMT Maragathain 2007 CTJ 728 CP NC.
12. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to succeed there will be a direction to the Opposite Party to consider application submitted by the Complainant and to issue the Possession Certificate sought for by the complainant in respect of the property covered under Ext A1, expeditiously in any event, within a period of one month from the date of service of copy of this order.
13. In the result complainant is allowed in part with a direction to the Opposite Party to issue Possession Certificate to the Complainant of his property in Rs.No.252/1-1.03 Balla Village for the particular extent covered by his tittle deed, to pay the nominal sum of Rs.5000/- (Five Thousand Only) as compensation to the complainant for Deficiency in service. Opposite party is also directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.3000/-(Three Thousand only) to the complainant. Time for compliance is within 30 days of the receipt of the order.
A1: Application for issue of Possession certificate
A2: Copy of letter
A3: Copy of letter
A4: Possession certificate
A5: Appeal preferred to District collector
A6: Appeal preferred to District collector
A7: Copy of lawyer notice
A8: Acknowledgement card
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
