Karnataka

Kolar

CC/52/2016

Sri Lakshmipathi, S/o. late Kavali Narayanappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Deputy Commissioner, O/o. Deputy Commissioner, - Opp.Party(s)

21 Oct 2016

ORDER

Date of Filing: 26/08/2016

Date of Order: 21/10/2016

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR.

 

Dated: 21^st DAY OF OCTOBER 2016

PRESENT

SRI. R. CHOWDAPPA, B.A., LLB…..    MEMBER (In-charge President)

SMT. A.C. LALITHA, BAL., LLB           ……  LADY MEMBER

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO :: 52 OF 2016

1) Sri Lakshmipathi,

S/o. late Kavali Narayanappa

 

2) Sri Narayanaswamy,

S/o. late Kavali Narayanappa,

Resi. Address of 1 & 2, Jiinkalavarapalli

Village, Cholashettyhalli Post,

Nagragere Hobli, Gowribidnur Taluk,

Chikkaballapur District

(In-Person)                                                                        ….  Complainants.

 

- V/s -

1) The Deputy Commissioner,

O/o. Deputy Commissioner,

District Administrative Buildings,

Chikkaballapur-562 101.

(Ex-parte)

 

2) The Assistant Director of Land Records

Chikkaballapur Sub-division,

Chikkaballapur-562101.

(In-person)

 

3) The Thasildhar,

Taluk Office, Gowribidnur Taluk,

Chikkaballapur District-561208

(Ex-parte)                                                     …. Opposite Parties.

-: ORDER:-

 

BY SMT. A.C. LALITHA, LADY MEMBER

01.   The complainants having submitted this complaint on hand as envisaged Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein after in short it is referred as “the Act”) against OPs has sought issuance of directions to the OPs to provide the requisite service of bifurcation of RTC services in Survey No.134 of G. Kothur Village, Nagaragere Hobli, Gowribidanur Taluk and to pay compensation towards loss and injury in a sum of Rs.2,0,1000/- (taken as in complaint) and any punitive damages as this Forum deems fit and to remove the defects in deficiencies in services and to discontinue unfair nature of services and not to repeat them, together with costs as this Forum deems fit.

 

02.   The facts in brief:-

(a)    It is contention of the complainants that, complainant Nos.1 & 2 are the brothers.  And that they applied for survey and bifurcation of RTC services in Sy. No.134 of G. Kothur Village, Nagaragere Hobli, Gowribidanur Taluk by paying requisite fee of Rs.1,000/- to OP No.3 on 17.03.2015.

 

(b)    Further it is contends that, Ops are suppose to give service with 60 days mandatory period but even after lapse of 400 days also Ops not given any service postponing by saying one or the other reason.

 

(c)    Further it is contended that, the land bearing Sy. No.134 measuring to an extent of 04 acre 24 guntas, situated at G.Kothur Village, Nagaragere Hobli of Gowribidanur Taluk, this land is in the name of complainant No.2.  They approached for bifurcation of this land with needful documents to OP No.3, but OP No.3 has not rendered its service, hence deficient in service.  So contending, the complainants have come up with this complaint on hand by seeking the above set-out reliefs.

 

 

(d)    Along with the complaint, the complainants have submitted affidavit evidence jointly and also submitted following documents:-

(i) Receipt pertaining to payment of Rs.1,000/- towards application No.28010813930832, dated: 17.03.2015.

 

(ii) RTC extract pertaining to Sy. No.134 in the name of Narayanaswamy Narayanappa for the year 2016-2017.

 

03.   In response to the notices issued with regard to the case on hand, as per the proceedings noted in the order-sheet dated: 21.09.2016 and dated: 04.10.2016, the OP No.1 and OP No.3 came to be placed exparte. 

 

04.   In response to the notice issued with regard to the case on hand, the OP No.2 has put in its appearance through Sri. R.Shivananda, Service Superintendent, ADLR, Chikkaballapura and submits its version.

 

(a)    On 13.10.2016 by post this Forum received a letter dated: 20.09.2016 from OP No.2 along with the copy of notice of this Forum and copy of complaint too.

 

(b)    OP No.2 in its letter dated: 20.09.2016 submits that, by admitting approach of complainant No.2 for survey in the said Sy. No.134 of Kothur Village, Nagaragere Hobli, Gowribidanur Taluk, and denied rest of averments of the complaint.

 

(c)    It submits that, with regard to the application dated: 17.03.2015, on 16.05.2015 the concerned licensed surveyor A.C. Shylaja had verified and returned the file due to technical problems in it.  Then the same was transferred to the Assistant Director of Land Records, Establishment, A.R. Vijaykumar.  After verification, he reported as, in Sy. No.134, as per the original document it measures total extent is 32 Acres 34 guntas, kharab 02 acres 30 guntas, kharab katha extent to 29 acre 34 guntas.  And in Sy. No.318 to 322 there is given new numbers as below mentioned:-

 

PÀæ¸À.	¸ÀªÉð £ÀA	L£ï J-UÀÄ	RgÁ§Ä J-UÀÄ	¨ÁQ
1	318 jAzÀ 322	28-07	2-23	25-24
2	134	4-27	0-07	4-20

 

After giving the new numbers, the remained area was permanently kept in Sy. No.134, there is note for Sy. No.134, therefore while preparing original note for this survey number the government surveyors prepared amendment file to an extent of 4-13 guntas, kharab 0-03 guntas.  In this regard they have sent notices to applicants and pahani holders through peon, but they have rejected the said notices.  Hence not possible to submit for amendment before Additional Director of Land Records.  Hence there is no deficiency in service and prays for dismissal of this complaint.

 

05.   As per the proceedings noted in the order-sheet dated: 04.10.2016 the affidavit filed by the complainant along with the complaint is considered as evidence on his behalf and as he continuously absent since filing suo-moto posted for orders.

 

06.   Therefore the points that do arise for our consideration in this case are:-

(A) Whether the Ops are guilty of deficiency in service as contended by the complainant?

(B) If so, to what relief the complainants are entitled for?

(C) What order?

 

07.   Findings of this District Forum on the above stated points are:-

POINT (A) & (B):- In the Negative

POINT (C):-  As per the final order

for the following:-

 

REASONS

POINT (A) & (B):-

08.   To avoid repetition in reasoning and as these points do warrant common course of discussion the same are taken up for consideration at a time.

 

(a)    As per the letter dated: 20.09.2016 submitted by OP No.2 clearly discloses that, there was/is sincere efforts were made by this OP No.2 with regard to Sy. No.134.

 

(b)    The complainant has not come up with any evidence as to how these Ops are guilty of deficiency in service.  Only self allegations of complainant cannot be believable.  Hence we opined that, these Ops are not guilty of deficiency in their service.

 

POINT (C):

09.   We proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

01.   For foregoing reasons this complaint stands Dismissed against OP Nos. 1 to 3 with no costs.

 

02.   Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer in the Open Forum, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 21^st DAY OF OCTOBER 2016)

 

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER                                MEMBER(In-charge of President)