Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/55/2019

Smt Nagarathnamma, W/o Late Ramappa.L - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Commissioner, Chitradurga City Municipality - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.Thippeswamy.N

30 May 2023

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:24/01/2019

DISPOSED ON:30/05/2023

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHITRADURGA.

C.C.NO:55/2019

DATED: 30^th May 2023

 

PRESENT: Kum. H.N. MEENA, B.A., LL.B., PRESIDENT

                  Smt. B.H. YASHODA, B.A., LL.B., LADY MEMBER        

  Sri. H.JANARDHAN, B.A.L., LL.B., MEMBER       

COMPLAINANT	Smt.Nagarathnamma.,           W/o Late Ramappa.L,           Aged about 58 years, Working as ANM,           G.R.Hally, R/o Kambali Beedi,     Behind Jaian Temple,     Doddapete, Chitradurga.   (Rep by N.Thippeswamy, Advocate)
V/s
OPPOSITE PARTIES	The Commissioner, Chitradurga City Municipality, Chitradurga.   (Rep by M.Umesh, Advocate)

 

::ORDER::

 

By Sri. H.JANARDHAN, B.A.L., LL.B., MEMBER.

 

 

        This is a complaint filed by the complainant Under Section 12 Consumer Protection Act 2019 seeking relief against the OP to ascertain and to make Haddubastu of complainant schedule property and direct the OP to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and other expenses failing which order to pay an amount as per Sub-Registrar Value, for the cost of the vacant site and 24 % interest per annum till the date of realization and for such other relief as this commission deems fit.

 

2. The Brief facts of the complaint is as follows:

 

Complainant who being the owner of  Vacant Site Katha No.2057 a assessment No.2057 /  1503 / A measuring East West 25 feet North South 35 feet belongs to one A.N.Basappa who is the father of the complainant.  After the death of the said A.N.Basappa the Khatha of the said property changed in favor of his wife Puttamma.  After changing the Katha of the said property said Puttamma enjoying the suit schedule property by having the absolute right, title, possession and interest.

3. Schedule property situated at First Block, Behind Doddapete, Koliburujanahatti, Chitradurga and she has paid the khandayam to the OP regularly. The above said property has been purchased from one Puttamma. The mother of the complainant digs the foundation at ground level and constructed basement on the schedule property. At this juncture, the adjacent owner by name Smt. Jayamma has disturbed the peaceful possession by keeping the stones and other materials over the schedule property. In this regard, the said Puttamma has filed a suit against Jayamma seeking for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction with respect to the schedule property before the 1 Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga in O.S.No.22/2002 The Hon'ble Court decreed the suit in favour of Puttamma. The said Puttamma executed a will with respect to the schedule. property in favour of complainant, the same has been registered before the Sub-Registrar on 30.06.1998 at Chitradurga. After the death of said Puttamma, the complainant submitted the registered will before the OP for change of Khata in her favour on 09.08.2016. In the month of August-2017, the complainant and her children were cleaning the schedule property with the help of JCB for construction of the shed over the schedule property. By that time, the adjacent owner by name, Jayamma with ulterior motive, intentionally tress pass the schedule property and obstruct the complainant by saying that the schedule property belongs to her. In this regard, the complainant has filed the permanent injunction suit against the adjacent.  Owner before the III Additional Civil Judge, Chitradurga, the same is pending before the Hon'ble Court. With regard to this, the OP has issued an endorsement on 18.08.2017 to the complainant stating that, the case is pending before the Hon'ble Civil Court.  Therefore, the complainant has filed complaint before this Forum seeking direction to the OP for fixing the Haddubastu.

4. The OP has collected the revenue and kandayam from the complainant, it is the bounden duty of the OP to consider the application given by the complainant. Hence complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP have filed this present complaint.

 

5. Points that arise for our consideration are as follows:-

 

1). Whether complainant is a consumer?

2). Whether complainant proves deficiency in service on the part of the OP?

3). Whether complainant is entitled for the relief as sought in the complaint?

4). What Order?

 

6. Our answers to the above points are as follows:

1. Negative

2. Negative

3. Does not arise for consideration

4. As per final order

:: REASONS ::

       7. Complainants submit that he was the owners of the schedule property bearing Khatha No.2057 Assessment No.2057/1503/A measuring East to West 25 feet North to South 35 feet situated at 1^st Block, Behind, Doddapete, Koliburujanahatty, Chitradurga, complainant have also paid kandayam to OP.  Above said property was purchased from one Puttamma.  The mother of the complainant digged the foundation at ground level constructed basement on the schedule property.  At that time the adjacent owner by name Smt. Jayamma had disturb possession by keeping the stones and other materials over the schedule property.  In this regard Smt.Puttamma had filed declaration suit with respective schedule property before the 1^st Additional Civil Judge Chitradurga, in O.S.NO.22/2002 complainant have produced property tax receipt of 2016/17, SAS form for vacant site 2016-17 Khatha extract for the year 2001-2002 which stands in the name of Puttamma Assessment extract of building and lands liable to taxation for the year 2001-2002 copy of O.S.No.22/2002 the judgment passed by the Additional Civil Judge Junior Division and JMFC, Chitradurga dated:23/11/2004 which decreed the Suit in favor of the Plaintiff i.e., Puttamma, objection letter given by one Shri Nagarathnamma that the schedule property Khatha should  not be transferred to any other person on 20/06/2018.

 

8. Complainant is also given a requisition for measuring the vacant land and to issue Haddubasthu copy to the complainant by requisition dated 20/07/2017.  Chitradurga Municipal Council Chitradurga, have issued an endorsement cum notice to the complainant i.e., Nagarathnamma on 20/07/2017 to produce original documents pertaining above said property and also produce sketch copy of the said property within 7 days of the said notice.  Complainant on 18/07/2017 has produced the documents to the OP of above said property by producing tax paid receipt copy of the Khatha tax Assessment extract of the OP.  Along with all other relevant documents.  However complainant have not produced the payment receipt that has been paid to OP to make the Haddubasthu of the schedule property. Complainant failed to show that monetary consideration has been passed on to the and OP he has availed the services of the OP to show that he is a consumer.  As per section 2(7) Consumer  Protection Act 2019 which states who is a "consumer" Consumer means any person who-

 

(i) buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, r under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid or partly promised or under any system of deferred payment, when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or

 

(ii) hires or avails of any service for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such service other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person, but does not include a person who avails of such service for does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose.

 

9. Complainant have only given requisition to the OP along with relevant documents to make Haddubasthu of the schedule property.  Complainant is only relying on tax paid receipt which he has paid for the property tax collected by City Municipal authority. The City Municipal Council has collected land revenue by the complainant for providing  the basic civic amenities but in this case complainant is seeking Haddubasthu from the OP without paying any monetary consideration to OP.  When no monetary consideration is paid to OP.  No consideration no service and complainant has also not produced any document regarding payment of monetary consideration for making Haddubasthu of the schedule property without any cogent document proof complainant is not a consumer and hence we answer point No.1 in the negative. 

 

10. However fixing Haddubasthu to the property is purely civil in nature and for which complainant has to approach competent  civil court to get this remedy but in this commission only consumers where there is deficiency by paying certain amount for availing the services such matters are only entertained by this commission but in the instant case complainant has not paid any monetary consideration to OP for fixing the Haddubasthu and also it is purely civil in nature which cannot be adjudicated by this commission.  Moreover complainant has not produced any cogent evidence to prove his case also it is the prerogative power of the concerned authority and also the parties have to produce relevant documents to the said authority without which the concerned authority cannot make Haddubasthu to said property and we cannot ascertain whether complainant has complied all the formalities of the said authority, for the above reasons cited supra complainant has failed to prove deficiency in service and hence we answer point No.2 in the negative.   When point No.1 and 2 is negative the point No.3 does not arise for our consideration.

For the foregoing reasons we proceed to pass the following order.        

:: ORDER ::

 

       The complaint filed by the complainant Under Section 12 Consumer Protection Act  is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by him, the transcript corrected, revised and

then pronounced in the open commission by us on 30^th  May 2023.)

 

 

 

            Sd/-                                   Sd/-                                  Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                MEMBER                      PRESIDENT

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

 

Witness examined on behalf of Complainant:

 

PW-1: Smt.Nagarathnamma, W/o Late Ramappa.L, by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

Nil

Documents marked on behalf of opponent:

 

Nil

            Sd/-                                   Sd/-                                  Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                MEMBER                      PRESIDENT