D.K. SURI vs GARHWAL JAL SANSTHAN

THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 5.3.1993 passed by District Consumer Forum, Dehradun in Complaint Case No.46/93. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant D.K. Suri is resident of Rajpur Road, Dehradun. Residential house at 30/8-I, Rajpur Road, Dehradun is self-occupied since 12.8.1979. On the self-occupied houses sewer tax rebate @ 25% is provided by the opposite party. The said rebate was not given by the opposite party to the complainant on the ground that the first house tax assessment be got revised from Nagar Palika, Dehradun and then only such a rebate can be granted. The complainant continued to deposit the sewer tax in which rebate was not given and such deposits were made under protest. Inspite of various letters addressed to opposite party the rebate was not given. The complainant lodged a claim before District Consumer Forum claiming refund of the excess sewer charges.

THE opposite party did not contest the case and the case proceeded ex-parte against the opposite party before the District Forum. District Forum after perusing the evidence came to the conclusion that the complainant had not given evidence for self occupation of the house for the previous years and directed that the rebate admissible from 1992-93 @ 25% should be made available to the complainant. The amount of rebate determined per year was Rs. 23.10p. from the year 1992-93 onwards by the District Forum.

Aggrieved of this order of the District Forum the complainant has come in appeal. In the grounds of appeal it has been stated that the house was self occupied w.e.f. 12.8.1979 and rebate @ 25% was admissible from that period onwards but the District Consumer Forum had given rebate only from 1992-93 onwards.

NOTICES were issued to the opposite parties. On 2.2.1996 Mr. Sharad Tewari, learned Counsel for the respondent has informed the Commission that dispute is being settled by the parties amicably but thereafter no appearance was made by the either party. On 10.5.2000 notices were issued again to both the parties but none was present. We have gone through the papers including the ones which have been filed before the District Consumer Forum by the appellant. A perusal of the judgment and order of the District Forum will go to show that the complainant had not informed the opposite party about the self-occupation of the house and such information was given only at a later stage. Therefore, sewer tax continued to be charged at ordinary rate without giving any rebate. Therefore the District Forum ordered the rebate @ 25% from 1992-93 onwards. In the circumstances, we do not find any justification for allowing rebate for the previous years for which necessary formalities were not done by the complainant. The judgment and order of the District Consumer Forum do not require to be interfered with. The appeal is, therefore, liable to be dismissed. ORDER The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to cost. Let copy as per rules be made available to the parties. Appeal dismissed.