BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM: KURNOOL

Present: Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member, PRESIDENT (FAC)

And

Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member

Thursday the 07^th day of February, 2013

C.C.No.92/2012

Between:

P.Raghava Reddy,

S/o. P.Swamy Reddy,

H.No.87/787, Madhavi Nagar,

Kurnool District-518 002.                                              …Complainant

                                       -Vs-

The Commissioner,

Kurnool Municipal corporation,

D.No.45-25-3, N.R. Peta,

Kurnool – 518 004.                                                 ...Opposite ParTy

This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri P.Siva Sudarshan, Advocate for complainant and opposite party called absent and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.

                                    ORDER

(As per Smt.S.Nazeerunnisa, Lady Member)

   C.C. No.92/2012

1.     This complaint is filed under section 11 and 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying:-

1. To direct the opposite party to refund of Rs.14,080/- collected from the complainant towards property Tax;

1. To issue demand notice in the name of complainant instead of Somayajulu;

1. To pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony;

1. To grant cost of the complaint;

  And

1. To grant any other relief as the Honourable Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2.    The case of the complainant in brief is as under:- On 19-04-2010 the complainant purchased hut D.No.87/787, Madhavi Nagar, Kurnool.  The complainant demolished the hut and obtained permission and approval of plan from opposite party under Letter No.220/110/91 dated 05-06-2010, for the construction of new house.  The complainant has completed the construction in the year 2012, and occupied the said house and that informed the said fact to opposite party by Letter dated 01-02-2012, and requested the opposite party to fix property tax on the said house.  The opposite party issued demand notice to the complainant for the payment of house tax on commercial basis assessment No.1016002442 from 01-04-2010 to 31-03-2012 of Rs.14,080/- in the name of Somayajulu, who was the earlier owner of the said house.  The complainant approached opposite party and requested to withdraw the demand notice, but opposite party did not respond.  On 07-03-2012 the complainant paid a sum of Rs.14,080/-, and made written representation to opposite party, for issuance of demand notice in his name and fixes the tax on Non-commercial basis.  Inspite of the request by him, the opposite party again issue demand notice dated 09-07-2012 in the name of earlier owner.  Due to the negligent act of opposite party the complainant suffered mental agony.  There is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.  Hence the complaint. 

3.     Opposite party called absent and set exparte.

4.     On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to A6 are marked and sworn affidavit of the complainant is filed. 

5.     Complainant filed written arguments.

6.     Now the points that arise for consideration are:

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?

1. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?

1. To what relief?

7.      POINTS i and ii:-  It is the case of the complainant that he purchased the old house D.No.87/787, Madhavi Nagar, Kurnool.   The complainant in his sworn affidavit clearly stated about the purchase of house.  Ex.A1 is the photo copy of registered sale deed dated 19-04-2010.  The complainant obtained approval from opposite party for construction of new house under (Ex.A6) bearing No.220-10-91 dated 05-06-2010.  He has completed construction and resided in the said house in the year, 2012 and that he informed the said fact to opposite party through letter Ex.A2 dated 01-02-2012 and that requested opposite party for fixation of house tax in the name of complainant.  The opposite party issued demand notice of property tax from 01-04-2010 to 31-03-2012 in the name of earlier owner Somayajulu, on commercial basis.  The opposite party insisted him for payment of amount, so the complainant paid an amount of Rs.14,080/-  under the receipt No.1015614802 dated 07-03-2012, which is marked as Ex.A3.  The complainant submitted written representation dated 13-03-2012 (Ex.A5) and that requested opposite party for fixation of house tax on Non-Commercial basis.  It is further case of the complainant that inspite of written representation by the complainant, the opposite party issued demand notice dated 07-07-2012 (Ex.A4)  in the name of earlier owner on commercial  basis.  The said fact was also stated by the complainant in his sworn affidavit.  The learned counsel appearing for the complainant contended that the opposite party granted permission to complainant for construction of residential house bearing D.No.87/787, Madhavi Nagar, Kurnool.  After the completion of construction, he informed the said fact and requested to issue demand notice in his name and on non commercial basis.  But the opposite party again issued demand notice in the name of earlier owner and on commercial basis is a clear deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.

        As seen from Ex.A1 it is clear that the complainant is the owner of the said house.  He obtained approval for construction of residential house under Ex.A6.  He has completed construction in the year 2012, and informed the said fact to opposite party through Ex.A2 and again made a written representation in this regard to opposite party, but the opposite party did not respond.   Taking into consideration all the material on record we are of the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.

8.     In the result the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite party to issue the demand notice in the name real owner (i.e.,) complainant P.Raghava Reddy instead of Somayajulu and fixation of taxes may be assess on the basis of residential house as per the Rules relating to the alteration of ownership of property in the assessment books of a Municipal Corporation and if any excess amount is paid by the complainant towards property tax, it may be refunded, and further direct to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-  compensation for mental agony along with cost of Rs.1,000/-.  Time for compliance is one month from the date of receipt of this order.

        Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 7^th day of February, 2013.

  Sd/-                                                                                  Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                                                             PRESIDENT (FAC)

                                 APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                    Witnesses Examined

For the complainant : Nil                 For the opposite party : Nill

List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-

Ex.A1                Photo copy of Sale Deed dated 19-04-2010.

Ex.A2                Photo copy of Letter of complainant to opposite party

dated 01-02-2012.

Ex.A3                Photo copy of Property Tax Receipt dated 07-03-2012.

Ex.A4                Photo copy of Property Tax Demand Notice dated 07-07-2012.

Ex.A5                Photo copy of Letter of complainant to opposite party

dated 13-03-2012.

Ex.A6                Photo copy of Proceeding dated 05-06-2010 along with Plan.

List of exhibits marked for the opposite party :- NILL

  Sd/-                                                                                  Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                                                             PRESIDENT (FAC)

    // Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//

Copy to:-

Complainant and Opposite parties  :

Copy was made ready on             :

Copy was dispatched on               :