BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B President
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A.LL.B., Lady Member
Thursday the 28th day of August, 2008
C.C.No. 27/08
Between:
M. Jadeeswar Reddy, S/o. Bali Reddy, Retired employee,
R/o. MIG. 6, APHB Colony, Kurnool. … Complainant
Versus
The Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner,
Kurnool. … Opposite party
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.R.Murali Krishna , Advocate, for the complainant, and Sri.D.Yella Reddy, Advocate, for the opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following
ORDER
(As per Smt. C. Preethi, Lady Member)
C.C.No.27/08
1. This consumer complaint of the complainant is filed U/S 11 and 12 of C.P,Act 1986 seeking a direction on opposite party to lay the drainage system in and around the colonies , Syamalanagar, Somappanagar , Housing board and to pay Rs. 1 lakh towards damages for mental agony , cost of the complaint and any other relief or relief which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainants case is that the complainant is a resident of A.P Housing board B.Camp , Kurnool within a limits of Kurnool Municipal Corporation. The complainant gave several representations to the opposite party with relevant to stagnation of rain and drain water and laying of drainage system at the neighboring colonies like Syamalanagar, Somappanagar. The rain and drain water from the house of said colonies stagnated at the back side of the complainants house which resulted in damages to the walls and flooring of the complainants house and also water flowing into toilets and thus unable to use the toilets. The complainant brought the above to notices of opposite party , but the opposite parties have not taken any steps to lay drainage system in and around colonies of the complainant . Though the opposite party is expected to provide basic amenities like laying drainage system and providing drinking water every day, thus the opposite parties causing inconvenience to the complainant. The vacant space at the back side of the complainants house is ideal and centre for growing of the mosquitoes of Dengue, malaria and chicken gunya. Nobody will except what kind of decease , the family of the complainant is going to get. The complainant is regularly paying taxes and the opposite party is receiving taxes from the complainant but the opposite party is not responding to the notices of the complainant and thus the above conduct of opposite parties amount to deficiency of service towards the complainant.
3. In support of his case the complainant relied on the following documents viz ., (1) letter endorsement dated 4-8-2004 as to mutation
of in favor of complainant, (2) Office copy of letter dated 17-9-2002 of complainant to opposite party along with acknowledgement and postal receipt, (3) Office copy of letter dated 14-10-2002 of complainant to opposite party along with acknowledgment & postal receipt, (4) Tax payment receipt, (5) Notice dated 24-11-2006 of complainant to District Collector, Kurnool ,marking copy to Municipal Commissioner along with courier receipt of collector and commissioner deliver sheet, (6) Notice dated 10-9-2007 of complainant to District Collector and Municipal Commissioner along with postal receipt., (7) Paper clipping dated 3-1-2003 of Andhra Jyothi.(8) Paper clipping dated 7-10-2007 of Vartha, (9) printed book as to citizens charter in reference to 40 ms. No.158 MA dated 25-4-2001, besides to the sworn affidavit of the complainant in reiteration of his complaint averments and the above documents are marked in Ex.A1 to A9 for its for its appreciation in this case and replies to the interrogatories exchanged.
4. In pursuance to the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite parties appeared through their standing counsel and contested the case by filling written version.
5. The written version of opposite party denies the complaint as not maintainable either in law or on facts, but submits that the surrounding colonies namely Syamalanagar, Somappanagar, doctors colony etc., were within the limits of Kallur Gram Panchayat. The Kallur Gram Panchayat merged with Kurnool Municiapl Corporation with effect from 8-2-2002. It further submits that the owners of lay out plan of housing board ,Syamalanagar, Somappanagar etc., were not laid down the roads and constructed drainage and handed over the roads and drainage system to the then Kallur Gram Panchayat. As per the prescribed lay out plans, it is mandatory on the part of the owners of lay out to form roads and to construct drainage system and to hand over the roads and drainage system to the local bodies . Thereafter, the local bodies have to maintain the roads and drainages, as drainage were not constructed by the owners the individual owners of the houses have to dug a drainage pit for discharging of drainage water from the houses. No drainage water is over flowing on to the roads. The plot back side to the complainants house is not maintained properly by the owner of said plot due to that the entire plot is full of thorny bushes and stagnation of water . The complainant has to complaint with the owner of that plot and not with this opposite party. It also submits that after merging of Kallur Gram Panchayat into Kurnool Municipal Corporation , the opposite party has taking several steps for laying the roads and drainage system by spending huge amount step by step and laid roads in A.P.Housing Board ,after it has merged with Kurnool Municipal Corporation . The opposite party also called for tenders for construction of CC drain in Housing Board Colony , Somappa Colony etc., It lastly submits that the house taxes paid by the complainant will not include the maintenance of drainage system and hence there is no deficiency of service on part of opposite parties and the complainant purchase the housing knowing fully that the plot back side the complainants house is not properly maintained and the claim for Rs.1 lakh is excessive and the complainant is not entitled to any amount and seeks for the dismissal of complaint with costs.
6. In substantiation of their case the opposite parties relied on the following documents viz., (1) attested letter of acceptance dated 30-1-2008 issued by opposite party to contractor, Kurnool , besides to the sworn affidavit of the opposite party in reiteration of his complaint averments and the above documents are marked as Ex.B1 for its appreciation in this case and replies to the interrogatories exchanged.
7. Hence, the point for consideration is to what relief the complainant is entitled alleging deficiency of service ?.
8. It is the simple case of the complainant that he purchased a house in A.P Housing board colony , which comes under the limits of Kurnool Municipal Corporation. The roads and drainage system are not constructed and maintained properly by the opposite party even after several letters, hence alleges deficiency of service on part of opposite parties . The complainant strongly contended that he is a regular payee of tax, thus he is a consumer under C.P.Act , 1986.
9. Section (2) (d) of C.P.Act deals with consumer, where in consumer means a person (1) who hires or avails of any services for consideration (i) which has been paid or (ii) promised or (iii) partly paid and partly promised (2) any beneficiary of such services. In this case the complainant has not placed any such material on record to show that he paid such amount as consideration to the opposite party, towards maintenance of roads and drainage system. The complainant in his complaint averments submitted that he is a regular payee of tax. Every citizen pays direct or indirect taxes to the state which goes to the general revenue of the State Government . The tax which is a levy made by the State for the general purpose of Government cannot be regarded as payment for any particular or special services. Payment of tax being a compulsory extraction of money by public authorities for public purposes and not being a voluntary payment for any services, person paying the tax is not considered as a person hiring the services of the government for consideration. Thus the Kurnool Municipal Corporation collecting tax from citizens cannot be treated as consideration for availing services rendered to the individual.
10. Thus, with the above position of law, the grievances of the complainant does not came within the purview of C.P.Act, 1986 and cannot be dealt by this forum. Hence, the case of the complainant is dismissed.
- In the result, the complaint is dismissed.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 28th day of August, 2008.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1. Letter endorsement dated 4-8-2004 as to mutation of
in favour of complainant.
Ex.A2. Office copy of letter dated 17-9-2002 of complainant
to opposite party along with acknowledgement and postal receipt.
Ex.A3. Office copy of letter dated 14-10-2002 of complainant to
opposite party along with acknowledgement postal receipt.
Ex.A4. Tax payment receipt.
Ex.A5. Notice dated 24-11-2006 of complainant to District Collector,
Kurnool marking copy to Municipal Commissioner along with courier receipt of collector and commissioner along with deliver sheet.
Ex.A6. Notice, dated 10-9-2007 of complainant to District Collector
and Municipal Commissioner along with postal receipt.
EX.A7. Paper clipping dated 3-1-2003 of Andhra Jyothi.
Ex.A8. Paper clipping dated 7-10-2007 of Vartha.
Ex.A9. Printed book as to citizens charter in reference to 40 ms.No.158MA
Dated 25-4-2001.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1. Attested letter of acceptance dated 30-1-2008 issued by
Opposite party to contractor, Kurnool.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite party.
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
