By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an Order directing the opposite party to reduce the house tax of the complainant which the opposite party is levying from the complainant without any basis.
2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant is residing in a house which consists of 4 rooms at Perumthatta under the Kalpetta Municipality for the last 10 years. The municipality is levying huge house tax from the complainant without any basis. The complainant made a written complaint to the Municipality on getting the first bill. But no action was taken by the opposite party till the date of filing of complaint. The House tax to the neighbors of the complainant is only 60 or 70 rupees only. Aggrieved by this the complaint is filed.
3. On receipt of complaint, notice was issued to opposite party and opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed version. In the version, the opposite party stated that the House tax is levied from the complainant under ML 3/05 from 01.04.2004. The complainant have to give objection on levy of tax notice within 30 days of the issuance of notice. But complainant gave revision petition after 6 years only on 29.06.2010. Such a revision petition cannot be considered since it is time barred. The complaint can submit return by self assessing the plinth area.
4. On perusal of complaint, version the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite party?
2. Relief and Cost.
5. Point No.1:- The complainant filed proof affidavit and the complaint is examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A5 is marked. The opposite party did not adduce oral evidence and not cross-examined the complainant. On perusal of opposite party's version, it is found that the opposite party is now taking steps to renew the tax. The complainant is a senior citizen and when such an application ie revision petition is submitted by a senior citizen, the opposite party should consider it in most priority and should redress the grievances. But here the opposite party failed to do it so far. The Forum found that the act of opposite party is nothing but deficiency of service. The point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- Since the Point No.1 is found in favour of complaint, the complainant is entitled to get cost and compensation.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to consider the revision petition of the complainant and to reduce the house tax of the complainant as much possible as the opposite party can. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) as cost of the proceedings and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) as compensation. The opposite party shall comply the Order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 31st day of January 2015.
Date of Filing:14.10.2014.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. P. A. Joseph(affidavit).
Witness for the Opposite Party:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1(1 to 9). Receipts.
A2. Sketch.
A3. Building Permit. dt:08.05.2013.
A4. Notice.
A5. Copy of Ration Card.
Exhibits for the opposite Party.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
a/-
