Orissa

Sonapur

C.D. 17/2011

NILANCHAL PUJHARI(48)Years. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Tahasildar,Binka. - Opp.Party(s)

L.D. Adv.

18 Jan 2012

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. C.D. 17/2011
 
1. NILANCHAL PUJHARI(48)Years.
S/O-Lokanath Pujhari,R/O-Sahajbahal,P/O-Sankara,P/S-Binka,Dist-Subarnapur.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Tahasildar,Binka.
PO/PS-Binka,Dist-Subarnapur.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

Date of Judgement Dt.24.1.2012

 

J U D G E M E N T

By Sri  S.C.Nayak, P.

 

            This is complainant’s case alleging deficiency of service on the part of O.P. the Tahasildar, Binka.

 

            The case of the complainant in nutshell is that he applied for certified copy of O.L.R. case No.15/2005 vide application No.145/2010. But he has not got the certified copy till the date of filing of this case. Hence he has prayed that he should be given Rs.2.00 Lakhs  as compensation for deficiency of service, mental agony and physical harassment.

 

            The O.P has not filed written version in this case. So we are of the considered opinion that he has no mind to speak and nothing to submit.

 

            As the complainant and the O.P. remained absent during hearing this case is being disposed of basing on the material available on records. The complainant  has alleged that certified copy of O.L.R. Case No.15/2005 has not been supplied to him. As per the provisions of paragraph 344 of Orissa Records Manual 1964 urgent certified copies should be given             during the course of the day and if that is not possible, reasons should be mentioned for the same. Since the O.Ps. and complainant are absent we are not in a position to know the present status. However it has been decided by the Hon’ble State Commission Odisha and reported             in 1998 O.L.R. Pages 33 to 35 in the case of Nilamani Swain Vrs. Collector, Cuttack and         others that stamp duty payable on the application for applying certified copy is for the purpose of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-:  2  :-

augmentation of revenue of the State and there is no service connected with it. Since in view of this decision of the Hon’ble State Commission Odisha the O.P. cannot be treated as a service provider, we are not in a position to give any relief to the complainant. The complainant may seek redressal of his grievances in any other forum if so advised. This complaint case is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

 

            Dated the 24th day of January 2012

                                                                                             Typed to my dictation

                 I agree                             I agree.                          and corrected by me.

 

 

 

 

         Smt. N.Parwin,               Sri A.Mishra                          Sri S.C. Nayak

             Lady Member                     Male Member                                 President

             Dt.24.1.2012                   Dt. 24.1.2012                            Dt. 24.1.2012                                

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.