AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
-THIS appeal has been filed against the order of the District Forum dated 10.2.93. Briefly the facts are that the complainant is the owner of house No. B-l /527 Janakpuri. It is alleged that he had been paying the sum of Rs. 60.28 as half yearly ground rent to the respondent as per conditions of the lease agreement regularly. However, no receipts were issued by them for deposit of the amounts in the State Bank of India (S.B.I.). He had deposited the rent for June, 1993 on 3rd December, 1982 in the S.B.I. He furnished all the details about the said payment through various letters to the DDA but still the amount had not been credited to his account. The respondent again asked him to deposit the amount vide letter dated 7/11 Oct., 88. The complainant therefore prayed that the respondent be directed to credit the said amount and pay damages to the tune of Rs. 5,766/-.
THE DDA, respondent No. 1, in their W.S. pleaded that the amount deposited by the complainant vide challan dated 3rd December, 82 had been credited to his account. THEy further stated that the other amounts deposited have also been credited to his account. However, they have not mentioned the date when the said amount of Rs. 60.28 had been credited to the complainant''s account. S.B.I., respondent No. 2, in their W.S., stated that the amount of Rs. 60.28 on account of ground rent was deposited by the complainant with them and that the same was sent to the DDA vide their draft No. 095609 dated 7.2.83 for an amount of Rs. 93,118.98. The draft amount included the said amount of Rs. 60.28.
The learned District Forum directed the respondent to pay an amount of Rs. 2,000/- as compensation to the complainant for harassment and expenditure incurred by him. The DDA has come up in appeal against the said order to the Commission.
THE learned Counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that the Bank did not send the details of the amount of Rs. 93,118.98 deposited by them in the account of DDA on 7.2.83 and, therefore, the said amount could not be credited to the complainant''s account. In support of his contention he has replied on a letter dated 5.3.88 to the Bank. We have duly considered the argument but do not find any substance therein. It is not deputed that the complainant deposited the amount of the ground rent in December, 82 and the amount had been credited to the account of the DDA by the Bank in Feb., 83. It was the duty of the DDA to have asked the bank, which is their agent, to send the details of the amounts in case the Bank had not furnished the same. It was, however, done by them in March, 88 i.e. after about five years. The complainant has sworn in an affidavit in which he stated that he had written 31 letters and sent them through couriers or by registered post to the DDA, Ministry of Public Grievances and others and had spent Rs. 620/- on account of postage etc. It is very curious that inspite of so many letters the DDA had been claiming the amount of Rs. 60.28 from him in subsequent bills. It has normally been seen that the officials of DDA are apathetic in such matters. They put the house owners and others to great inconvenience by claiming the amounts again and again, which they have already deposited. It will be proper that the damages be recovered by DDA from the delinquent official(s).
AFTER taking into consideration all the aforesaid circumstances we do not find any merit in the appeal and dismiss the same. As the respondent is not present in the Court, therefore, we make no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.