This complaint coming up before us for final hearing on                      26-04-11 in the presence of Sri T. Durga Prasad, advocate for complainant and of Sri K. Naganjaneyulu, advocate for Opposite party, upon perusing the material on record and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Forum made the following: 

O R D E R

Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao, President:-

        The complainant filed this complaint U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the sufferings and mental agony under went by the complainant and for costs.

2.    In brief the averments of the complaint are these:

        The complainant on 29-09-08 requested the 1^st opposite party to supply copies of certain documents and information by paying the required fees.  The 1^st opposite party supplied information regarding item No.1 only but not the information under Sl.Nos.2 to 5 of his application.   Instead of furnishing information the opposite parties entered into unnecessary correspondence with the complainant.  The complainant on 22-09-2000 also sought information from the opposite parties.   But there is no response.  The respondents committed deficiency of service by not providing any information.  The complainant suffered a lot as the opposite parties did not provide information.   The complaint therefore be allowed.

3.    The contention of opposite parties in brief is hereunder:

    The complainant paid the necessary fees at every stage.  The complainant filed OS.69/07 on the file of the Court of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Tenali for removal of existing old metal road and planted cement poles in the middle of the road and the same is pending on transfer before the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Repalle as OS.56/08.  The opposite parties furnished information to the complainant on 27-11-09.   The complainant filed this complaint to harass the opposite parties. The complaint therefore be dismissed.

4.     Exs.A-1 to A-9 on behalf of complainant and Ex.B-1 on behalf of opposite parties were marked.

5.     Now the points that arose for consideration are:

1. Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of service?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation and if so to what amount?
3. To what relief?

6.   POINT No.1:-     Ex.B-1 revealed that the opposite parties furnished information in response to the letters of the complainant dated 29-09-08 and 04-11-08.   Under Ex.A-2 letter dated 04-11-08 the complainant sought information regarding nine items.   Ex.B-1 revealed that the opposite party furnished information on 27-11-09 vide ROC.No.1513/2005/C1.  In Ex.B-1 reference was made to Ex.A-9 letter.

7.     The nature and conduct of complainant is known to the opposite parties in view of correspondence between them.    The opposite party failed to show that they served copy of Ex.B-1 on the complainant.   Neither postal receipt nor postal acknowledgment was filed into Forum to show it.   We therefore opine that the opposite parties committed deficiency of service in not providing the information to the complainant.  Hence, this point is answered in favour of complainant.       

8.     The complainant claimed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as damages without seeking the main relief of information for the reasons best known to him.  As to how the complainant estimated the damages at Rs.1,00,000/- did not find place in the complaint. The complainant did not seek information from the opposite party. Under those circumstances, awarding nominal damages for committing deficiency of service in our considered opinion will meet ends of justice.  We therefore award Rs.500/- as damages to the complainant.   Hence, this point is answered in favour of the complainant.

9.    POINT No.3:-   In view of above findings on points 1 and 2, in the result the complaint is allowed partly as indicated below:

        1.     The opposite parties 1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs.500/-                         (Rupees five hundred only) towards compensation and                     Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards costs. 

        2.     The amounts ordered above shall be paid within a period of              six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

Dictated to junior stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 10th day of May, 2011.         

            MEMBER                                                                            PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

  DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite parties:        

                                                                                           PRESIDENT