District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 100/2022.
Date of Institution: 23.02.2022.
Date of Order: 13.09.2022.
Pradeep S/o Late Shri Satbir Singh, R/o House No. 1560, Indira Complex, Greater Faridabad, Haryana.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. The Commissioner, Muncipal Corporation Faridabad, B.K.Chowk, NIT, Faridabad.
2. The Joint Commissioner, Muncipal Corporation Faridabad, Old Faridabad Zone, Opposite ITI, Old Faridabad.
3. The Zonal and Taxation Officer/Authorized Signatory, Muncipal Corporation Faridabad, Old Faridabad Zone, Opposite ITI, Old Faridabad.
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………..Member
PRESENT: Sh. Narender Sharma, counsel for the complainant.
Smt. Ranjana Sharma, counsel for opposite parties Nos.1 to 3.
ORDER:
Today the case was fixed for fixed for filing evidence on behalf of the complainant as well as for filing reply to application for amendment/rectification in para No.13,14 and 15 and also consideration on the statements of parties on 08.08.2022.
Shri Pardeep son of late Shri Satbir Singh, R/o House No. 1560, Indira Complex, Greater Faridabad has made a statement that “House tax has been deposited upto 2015-16 and the complainant is ready to deposit the next house tax whatever due from 2015-16 to up to date and complainant requested for the rectification in the number of his house i.e whether 1560 or 1058 instead this property Id of the complainant/applicant may kindly be issued in the interest of justice.”
On the other hand, Smt. Ranjana Sharma, counsel for opposite parties Nos.1 to 3 has made a statement that “as per reply filed on behalf of MCF dated 12.07.2022, an amount of Rs.36,409/- has become due against property NO. 1560 till 2019-20 and after adjusting an amount of Rs.4636/- deposited by the complainant against two receipts, the remaining amount comes to Rs.31,773/- which the complainant is required to pay for the relief sought for in his application.”
In this complaint , the complainant has prayer in his prayer clause that opposite parties be directed to consider the earlier deposited House Tax Receipts as valuable proof of house tax regarding the said house and the opposite parties be directed to charge about actual figure of house tax from 2016-2020 and upto date.
On the basis of the statement of the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the chain of ownership supplied by the complainant to opposite party. Hence, the complaint is disposed off with the direction to opposite party to issue property ID to the complainant and charge the amount from the complainant whatever is due of his house.. There are no order as to costs. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 13.09.2022 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
