This complaint coming up before us for final hearing on                      22-03-11 in the presence of Sri M.Sravan Kumar, Advocate for complainant and of Sri J.Narasimha Rao, Advocate for opposite party, upon perusing the material on record, hearing both sides and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Forum made the following: 

O R D E R

Per Sri M.V.L.Radha Krishna Murthy, Member:

                This complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the complainant praying to direct the opposite party to execute a registered sale deed following the directions of District Cooperative Officer, Guntur in the name of complainant, to grant Rs.50,000/- toward mental agony and for costs of complaint.

The averments of complaint in brief are as follows:

                The complainant is one of the founder members of opposite party Society.  She also signed as one of the signatory at the time of registration of Society in the year 1983.  She was allotted plot No.92 and when she requested for east facing plot, then plot No.107 is given to her.  Subsequently she constructed a house in plot No.107 by taking loan from Andhra Bank Home Finance Limited, Vijayawada.  At the time of taking loan, the opposite party also issued a letter by way of certificate on 24-07-95 that she is the member of Society and she was allotted plot No.107.  Subsequently after discharging loan, the bank people also executed release deed in favour of complainant in the year 2001.  Later she requested for registration of plot mentioning that she is eligible for exemption of stamp duty. After prolonged correspondence with the Cooperative Department by the complainant, the District Cooperative Officer, Guntur passed orders on 25-02-10 under RC No.1983/2006-N, through which directed the opposite party to extend concessions exempting stamp duty and registration fee while making registration by the Society.  The said proceedings were also communicated to opposite party. After that the complainant personally met the opposite party several times and requested to register the property in her name by executing registered sale deed and further informed the opposite party that she will give undertaking specifically mentioning that in future if the registration department claims any amount towards stamp duty she will bear the same.  Though the opposite party is bound to register property following the directions of District Cooperative Officer in the name of complainant, it is not doing the same and thus committed deficiency of service.  Due to non registration of plot by opposite party, the complainant suffered a lot mentally and that therefore she is entitled for damages for mental agony.  Hence, the complaint.

                The opposite party Society filed its version affidavit and the same in brief is as follows:

                Most of the averments mentioned in the complaint are false, incorrect and invented for the purpose of filing complaint. This Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the complainant is neither a customer nor consumer for opposite party Society and he has to approach Prl. District Court by raising dispute under Societies Registration Act.  The complainant was originally allotted plot No.92 in the Society and subsequently on 28-08-93, the complainant gave letter to the Secretary of opposite party seeking cancellation of her membership in the Society and transfer the plot No.92 in favour of one GVL Madhavi, daughter of G.Viswanadham.  Accordingly, the Society cancelled complainant’s membership and transferred the same in the name of GVL Madhavi D/o.Viswanadham and complainant’s name was deleted in the admission register of Society and thus GVL Madhavi became the second allottee of plot No.92. 

                Plot No.107 of the Society was original allotted to one Anugolu Venkateswara Rao and he is the original allottee in respect of said plot.  The said Venkateswara Rao gave a letter dt.28-08-93 to the Society to cancel his membership in the Society and transfer his plot in the name of complainant as she paid the amount due to him under the transaction. Accordingly opposite party Society cancelled the membership of Anugolu Venkateswara Rao and transferred plot No.107 to complainant as per resolution dt.30-09-93.  Thus the complainant became second allottee of plot No.107 having purchased the same from original allottee Anugolu Venkateswara Rao.  The contention of complainant that at her request, the opposite party Society gave east plot bearing No.107 changing plot No.92 is utterly false and it is a concocted one.  As the complainant is a second allottee to plot No.107 she is not entitled to seek exemption of stamp duty and registration fee as per Government Memo No.19659/Reg.I(2/2002) dt.08-12-03.  On the application to DCO, Guntur by complainant, this opposite party submitted reply furnishing the fact of getting plot No.107 by complainant mentioning that the action may be taken without condition of placing responsibility on Management Committee of Society as fixed in the earlier cases to whom exemption has been granted from payment of stamp duty and registration fee and submitted proposal to Cooperative Department.  The District Cooperative Officer, Guntur issued certificate in respect of complainant’s plot by clearly mentioning that the Society function is solely responsible to identify Society member/legal heir under column No.6 properly at the time of registration and further mentioned that if any irregularity noticed at a later date, the resulting loss caused to the revenue of Government shall stands recoverable from the Management Committee Members along with  Secretary of 2^nd opposite party and the person on whose name the plot was registered.  In the certificate issued by DCO, Guntur, it was indicated under column No.6 that the complainant is original allottee of plot No.107 even though she was not original allottee of plot No.107.  In the meeting held on 07-02-10, the 2^nd opposite party members passed resolution rejecting the claim of the complainant and the same was communicated to DCO, Guntur through a letter dt.19-03-10.  The complainant mainly depended upon the certificate issued by DCO dt.25-02-10 and for seeking any relief in this matter the complainant ought to have added the District Cooperative Officer, Guntur as proper and necessary party.  The opposite party followed the guidelines and rules that were issued by the Government from time to time in respect of seeking exemption of stamp duty and registration amount in respect of members of Society.   This opposite party has not committed any negligence or deficiency of service.  The complainant being a second allottee of plot No.107, she cannot claim exemption of stamp duty in respect of said plot. Hence, the complaint may be dismissed with costs.                

                On behalf of complainant chief examination affidavit was filed reiterating the facts mentioned in their version.  The opposite party Society also filed chief affidavit in support of his version reiterating the same.

                On behalf of complainant Ex.A1 to A15 are marked.  On behalf of opposite party Society Ex.B1 to B10 are marked.

                Ex.A1 is the copy of letter addressed by Anugolu Venkateswara Rao to opposite party dt.28-08-93.  Ex.A2 is the receipt for Rs.1850/- for plot No.107 issued in favour of complainant.  Ex.A3 is the certificate issued by opposite party.  Ex.A4 is the mortgage deed executed by complainant dt.13-11-95 in favour of AB Homes Finance Limited.  Ex.A5 is the mortgage release deed executed by Andhra Bank Housing Finance limited.  Ex.A6 is the memo of Government of AP dt.08-12-09.  Ex.A7 is the letter addressed by complainant to the President of opposite party for registration of house plot No.107.  Ex.A8 is another letter addressed by complainant to the Commissioner of Cooperation and Registrar of Cooperative Societies.   Ex.A9 is the letter addressed by complainant to the President of opposite party dt.01-06-09.  Ex.A10 is the letter addressed by complainant to the Principle Secretary to Government, Agricultural Marking and Cooperation Department, Govt. of AP Hyderabad dt.04-07-09.  Ex.A11 is the memorandum of Commissioner of Cooperation AP, Hyderabad. Ex.A12 is the certificate issued by the Cooperative Officer, Guntur dt.25-02-10. Ex.A13 is the registered notice got issued by complainant to opposite party Society dt.17-06-10.  Ex.A14 is the postal acknowledgement.  Ex.A15 is the registered notice got issued by opposite party Society to the complainant dt.24-06-10.  

                Ex.B1 is the letter addressed by Divisional Cooperative Officer, Tenali to opposite party Society.  Ex.B2 is the blank proforma.  Ex.B3 is the letter addressed by opposite party to the Divisional Cooperative Officer, Tenali.  Ex.B4 is the resolution passed by opposite party dt.26-02-06.  Ex.B5 is the certificate issued by District Cooperative Officer, Guntur dt.28-02-07.  Ex.B6 is the letter addressed by opposite party to the District Cooperative Officer dt.19-03-10.  Ex.B7 is the copy of resolution passed by opposite party.  Ex.B8 is the letter addressed by Divisional Cooperative Officer, Tenali to opposite party Society dt.14-12-09.  Ex.B9 is the letter addressed by complainant to opposite party Society dt.28-08-93.  Ex.B10 is the copy of registration certificate of opposite party along with its resolution. 

Now the points for consideration are

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party Society?
2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

POINTS 1 & 2:

                The case of complainant is that she was a member of opposite party Society and that she was allotted plot No.92 and when she requested for east facing plot then she was given plot No.107 by the Society and that she constructed a house in plot No.107 that by taking finance from Andhra Bank Home Finance Limited, Vijayawada and that she obtained exemption certificate from District Cooperative Officer, Guntur regarding stamp duty and registration fee for registering the plot No.107 by the opposite party Society and that the opposite party Society has not registered the plot inspite of her request and thus the opposite party Society committed deficiency of service.

                The case of opposite party Society is that originally complainant was allotted plot No.92 by opposite party Society and that the complainant gave letter to the Society seeking cancellation of her membership in the Society and to transfer the plot No.92 which was allotted to her in favour of one GVL Madhavi daughter of Viswanadham and accordingly opposite party Society transferred plot No.92 in favour of GVL Madhavi, that plot No.107 of the Society was originally allotted to one Anugolu Venkateswara Rao and that said Venkateswara Rao gave letter to Society to cancel his membership and to transfer plot No.107 in favour of complainant and accordingly, the Society transferred plot No.107 in the name of complainant and thus the complainant became second allottee of plot No.107 and that as the complainant is not original allottee of plot No.107 she is not entitled for exemption of stamp duty and registration fee as per Government Memo and that while issuing exemption certificate the District Cooperative Officer granted exemption to complainant with a condition that “if any irregularity noticed at a later date the resulting loss caused to revenue of government shall stands recoverable from Management Committee Members along with Secretary of opposite party Society and the person on whose name the plot was registered”, that as the District Cooperative Officer while granting exemption has stipulated such a condition fixing responsibility on the opposite party Society,  the opposite party Society in its executive meeting passed a resolution to the effect that “it is unanimously resolved not to hold responsibility for the recovery if the revenues of Government is found loss from the Managing Committee and the Secretary of Society.  Not to register plot No.107 in favour of Smt.G.Krishna Kumar (complainant) since plot No.107 was not originally allotted to Smt.G.Krishna Kumari…………………………………” and that in view of said resolution they have not registered plot No.107 in favour of complainant and thus they have not committed any deficiency of service. 

                The complainant in her complaint mentioned that “she was allotted plot No.92 and when she requested for east facing plot then plot No.107 is given to her.  As seen from Ex.A1 letter addressed by one Anugolu Venkateswara Rao to opposite party Society, he requested the opposite party Society to transfer his membership and plot No.107 to complainant as she has paid him the amount due for transfer.  Thus it clearly shows plot No.107 was originally allotted to one Anugolu Venkateswara Rao and at his request his membership was canceled and transferred plot No.107 in favour of complainant by opposite party Society.  Thus she became the second allottee of plot No.107 but she is not the original allottee of plot No.107 as averred in her complaint.  The complainant further averred in her complaint that the District Cooperative Officer directed opposite party to extend concessions exempting stamp duty and registration fee while making registration by opposite party Society. But as seen from Ex.A12 certificate issued by District Cooperative Officer dt.25-02-10, the exemption was given to complainant regarding payment of stamp duty and registration fee while making registration by opposite party Society and imposed a condition that the Society functionaries are solely responsible to identify Society member as noted under column No.6 and also imposed a condition that “in the even of any irregularity noticed at a later date the resulting loss caused to the revenue of government shall stands recoverable from the management committee members along with secretary of opposite party Society and the person on whose name the plot was registered.”  Further in Ex.A12 certificate, the District Cooperative Officer in column No.6 of certificate showed the name of complainant as original allottee/legal heir, even though she was not the original allottee of plot No.107.  Thus the District Cooperative Registrar has issued an exemption certificate under Ex.A12 to complainant from payment of stamp duty and registration fee regarding plot No.107 by imposing above said conditions but he has not at all directed opposite party Society to register plot No.107 to complainant as alleged by complainant in her complaint.   As already stated above as the complainant is not the original allottee of plot No.107 of opposite party Society, the opposite party Society is declined to accept the condition imposed by the District Cooperative Registrar as stipulated in the certificate Ex.A12 and passed a resolution in its executive meeting held on 07-03-10 as follows:

                  “It is unanimously resolved not to hold responsibility for the recovery if the revenues of Government is found loss from the Managing Committee and the Secretary of Society.  Not to register plot No.107 in favour of Smt.G.Krishna Kumar (complainant) since plot No.107 was not originally allotted to Smt.G.Krishna Kumari…………………………………” and informed the said resolution of Society to the District Cooperative Registrar under Ex.B6.

                During the course of arguments, the counsel for complainant argued that the opposite party Society has paid stamp duty registration fee at the time of acquisition of land for its members and the exemption was not claimed earlier against plot No.107 and that therefore, the complainant is entitled for exemption but the District Cooperative Registrar has not mentioned the said fact in Ex.A12 certificate of exemption while granting the same to complainant.  The District Cooperative Registrar has granted exemption under Ex.A12 showing the complainant as original allottee/legal heir regarding plot no.107.  As already stated above complainant is not the original allottee of plot No.107 of opposite party Society as she has purchased the same from one A. Venkateswara Rao as evidenced under Ex.A1.  Therefore in the circumstances of case, we cannot find any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party Society since District Cooperative Registrar has imposed condition placing responsibility for recovery of revenue loss if any found subsequently.  In view of facts and circumstances of case, we find no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party Society in not registering plot No.107 in favour of complainant.  Accordingly this issue is answered against the complainant.              

                In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Junior Steno, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 26^th day of March, 2011.

          MEMBER                                  MEMBER                           PRESIDENT         

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                        DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For Opposite Party:                                                                                         

                                                                                               PRESIDENT