BEFORE THE LEARNED DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
REF. DCDRF (I) =
/2012
IN THE MATTER OF
An application under Section 12 of
The Consumer Protection Act, 1986
AND
IN THE MATTER OF
KMC
ASSESSEE NO. 11-047-03-0160-0 WITH
AND
IN THE MATTER OF
Uma Shankar Agarwal
42, B B Ganguly Street, 1st Floor,
Kolkata - 700 012
Mobile : +91 9830559684
email: agarwal.us@gmail.com
………..Petitioner
Versus
The Asstt. Assessor Collector (N)
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation
Assessment-Collection Department
5, S N Banerjee Road,
Kolkata – 700 013
………. Opposite Party
The humble petition on behalf of the
Petitioner above named:
Most Respectfully Showeth :
1.
The Petitioner is aged about 54 years and is a Chartered Accountant working for
gain as Partner of M/s. U S Agarwal & Associates at 42, B B Ganguly Street,
Kolkata - 700 012.
2.
That your Petitioner under a Sub Lease Agreement Dt. 23.02.2000 from Mr.
Vinod Bhagat, is in occupation of about 244.54 sq. ft. office space in the first
floor at 42, B B Ganguly Street, Kolkata – 700 012 and the Lessor is Lords Sri Sri
Radhaballav jiew, Sri Sri Jagannath Jiew, Sri Sri Lakshmi Thakurani Jiew, Sri Sri
Mahaprabhu and Sri Sri Mahadeo Jiew Trust.
3.
That your Petitioner received consolidated Demand Notice dt. 04.01.95 from the
Collection Department of CMC (now KMC), with Assessee no. 11047030003-6 for
the entire premises for Rs. 18,83,372/- and also the occupiers share of
Rs.863.70. Annexure - A
4.
That your petitioner was not allotted with any Assessee no. by then.
5.
On 22nd March, 1996 Officers from KMC visited the premises and had collected
few cheques as deposit under protest and are to be adjusted towards future tax
liability of the occupier. The cheques were received by CI XX. KMC had agreed to
issue receipt for the above cheques, but the same was never received. Out of
which Rs. 30,000/- was paid by the petitioner vide cheques no. 456672 drawn on
Canara Bank, Bowbazar Branch which was cleared on 28th March, 1996. The
above payments were recorded in Section 20 Book No. 1 and page 291 of KMC.
Annexure – B.
6.
Again on 6th April, 1998 Officers from KMC visited the premises and had collected
few cheques as deposit under protest and are to be adjusted towards future tax
liability of the occupier. Out of which Rs. 20,000/- was paid by the petitioner vide
cheques no. 697182 drawn on Canara Bank, Bowbazar Branch which was cleared
on 11th April, 1998. These payments were received vide receipt No. A37971 dt.
6th April, 1998 of KMC. Annexure - C
7.
Vide KMC letter dated 10th January, 2000 received by the petitioner on 29th
January, 2000 with a request was received for the mutation of the property.
8.
The Petitioner submitted a reply to KMC on 11th February, 2000 praying for time
for mutation as the registration of the conveyance was under process.
9.
On 30th December, 2002 the Petitioner received a letter from KMC dt. 23rd
December, 2002 stating that the outstanding amount upto quarter 4/1986-1987
being zero. Annexure - D
10.
The petitioner was in receipt of the following bills from KMC. Annexure - E
Bill No.
Q478
Date
Net Amount
18.07.03
15888.00
Period
4/1986-87 3/1992-93
Q479
Q480
18.07.03
18.07.03
19056.00
18126.00
4/1992-93 3/1998-99
4/1998-99 2/2003-04
11.
Vide the above bills the petitioner was allotted with Assessee no. 11-047-030160-0.
12.
Vide letter dt. 18th August, 2003 the Petitioner requested KMC for adjustment of
the advance amount of Rs. 50,000/- paid in the year 1996 and 1998 and to
revise the bill accordingly. Annexure - F
13.
The Petitioner vide letter dated 6th January, 2004 again requested KMC for the
adjustment and had submitted copies of the bank statement and a certificate
from The Manager, Canara Bank, BowBazar Branch, certifying that the amounts
were paid to KMC. Annexure - G
14.
The Petitioner again informed KMC vide letter dt. 19th May, 2004 and submitted
an indemnity bond. Annexure - H
15.
Another request letter dt. 22nd September, 2004 was made by the Petitioner to
KMC. Annexure - I
16.
Vide letter of intimation No. 0528592 dt. 5th March 2007, the petitioner received
a demand for Rs. 55,868/- from KMC. Annexure - J
17.
The Petitioner replied to the LOI vide letter dt. 16th June 2007, and requesting
KMC for the adjustment of Rs. 50,000/- paid in advance. Annexure - K
18.
Another LOI No. 0747513 dt. 12th June, 2008 for Rs. 55,868/- was received by
the Petitioner from KMC. Annexure - L
19.
The Petitioner vide its letter dt. 22nd July, 2008 responded to the above LOI and
again requested for advance amount of Rs. 50,000/-. Annexure - M
20.
In the meantime, KMC came out with a waiver scheme and a waiver letter of
intimation No. 0975836 dated. 1st February, 2012 for an amount payable after
waiver of interest on waiver of penalty of Rs. 70,789/- without adjusting the
advance amount of Rs. 50,000/- paid, was received from KMC. Annexure - N
21.
The Petitioner vide letter dt. 16th March, 2012 made a detailed appeal to KMC for
adjustment of the advance amount of Rs. 50,000/-. Annexure - O
22.
Again the Petitioner made a petition vide letter dated 13th April, 2012 to KMC
with the available supporting for adjustment of the advance amount of Rs.
50,000/-. Annexure - P
23.
No reply from KMC was received for any of the above letters/ Petition/ Appeal at
any point of time.
24.
KMC vide letter no. 926/047/11-122/AC(N) XVI dt. 3rd April, 2012 acknowledged
the petitioner’s letter dated 16th March, 2007 and directed the petitioner to
submit the original receipts. Annexure - Q
25.
The Petitioner vide letter dt. 13th April, 2012 submitted the original bank
statements to KMC for the advance payment of Rs. 50,000/- . Annexure - R
26.
Vide communication no. AC(N) XVI/1084/12-13 dt. 21st April, 2012 of KMC, the
Assistant Assessor-Collector (N) Division No. XVI intimated the petitioner that “I
HAVE BEEN DIRECTED TO INFORM YOU THAT YOU HAD PAID THE
EARLIER WAIVER AMOUNTS – FOR PRORATA SHARE OF MOTHER
LIABILITY DEMAND PRIOR TO APPORTION TO YOUR APPORTIONED
PERIOD i.e. 4/86-87 WHICH IS NOT CREDITIBLE TO YOU’RE A/C.
HENCE, YOU MAY PAY THE WAIVER LOI AMOUNT TO AVAIL WAIVER
SCHEME.” Annexure - S
27.
That the Petitioner further submits that the opposite party had never replied to
the letter/communications/appeal of the petitioner and in a very illegal manner
has adjusted amount paid by the petitioner to the account of a third party, even
when they have confirmed vide letter dt. 23rd December, 2002 stating that the
outstanding amount upto quarter 4/1986-1987 being zero for the petitioner.
28.
That the cause of action for this case arose on 21st April 2012 at Kolkata being
the date of last communication received from KMC.
29.
Reliance is given for a similar case judgment H.P. Gupta v. Municipal
Corporation of Delhi [1995] CCJ 349.
Brief fact of the Case :
In August 1992 the complainant had received a notice from the Assistant
Assessor and Collector of the Municipal Corporation, Delhi, demanding arrears of
house-tax amounting to Rs.1,72,771 upto Rs.31.3.1992. Several letters written
by the complainant that no arrears were due from him remained ignored.
Instead, another bill was received by him and to the objection raised by him,
there was no response. The officer concerned directed the bank of the
complainant to freeze his account. The Bank did freeze the account. Despite
several notices and several adjournments, no nominee of the Corporation
appeared before the State Commission.
The State Commission held:
The facts alleged by the complainant seemed to be correct. Despite his letters,
the Corporation, without proper investigation into the matter, got the bank
account of the complainant frozen. Though, the account was later de-frozen the
Commission held it to be a case of deficiency of service and awarded damage.
30.
That under the above circumstances the petitioner thus has to come up before
the Ld. Forum for getting necessary order with the direction upon the opposite
party to adjust amount of advance of Rs. 50,000/- paid by the petitioner from
the outstanding Property Tax of KMC, pay interest @ 12% per annum on the
advance amount collected till determination of the Property Tax by 18.07.2003,
to give all relief as per the waiver scheme of KMC and the petitioner undertakes
to pay the balance amount of tax, if any, within seven days of determination of
the tax amount. The petitioner is also claiming an amount of Rs. 50,000/- as
compensation due to mental agony and harassment and Rs. 20,000/- as legal
expenses.
31.
INTERIM RELIEF :
It is prayed that am Interim Relief be given by the Ld. Court directing KMC not to
proceed with any action against the Petitioner till disposal of this petition and to
maintain status quo till such time.
32.
That for the purpose of filing this complaint the petitioner is paying necessary
fees as per amended provision of the Act.
UNDER the above circumstances it is prayed
that your honour be pleased to admit this
petition and your petitioner prayed the
following orders:(i)
to issue notice upon the opposite
party;
(ii)
After hearing an order may kindly be
passed directing the opposite party
to pay the adjust the advance
amount of Rs. 50,000/- along with
interest
@
12%
p.a.
till
determination of the tax;
(iii)
To give full benefit of the KMC
Waiver scheme as the petition for
waiver was made in time;
(iv)
To award compensation to the tune
of Rs. 50,000/-;
(v)
To pay Rs. 20,000/- being cost of
legal expenses; and
(vi)
To pass other orders as your honour
may deem fit and proper.
And for this your petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.
AFFIDAVIT
I, Uma Shankar Agarwal, son of Late Sagar Mall Agarwal, aged about 54 years,
by faith Hindu, by occupation Chartered Accountant working for gain at 42, B B
Ganguly Street, Kolkata - 700 012, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as
under;1.
That I am the petitioner in this case and I am well conversant with the
facts and circumstances of the case.
2.
That the above made statements are true to the best of my knowledge
and belief and nothing has been concealed.
DEPONENT
Identified by me,
Advocate