Here is what the OP would like to prove:
The attempt, however, combines premises 2 and 3 into one conjunction. It is best to copy the premises as they are into the first lines of the proof.
The OP would also like the following:
...please suggest me books for Logic and Natural Deduction.
The following proof uses the proof checker associated with the forallx Calgary Remix: An Introduction to Formal Logic text. This is a beginning truth-functional and first-order logic textbook. See links below. They may complement the references provided by Bruno Bentzen or what you are using now.
Here is the proof using that proof checker:
Here is the proof in words:
- The first premise allows us to derive $L$ from the second premise using conditional elimination (→E).
- The first premise also allows us to derive $D$ from the third premise using biconditional elimination (↔E).
- Having $L$ we can use disjunction introduction (vI) to "or" anything to it. In particular, we "or" the $A$ that we need.
- We have both sentences that we need on lines 5 and 6 and so we use conjunction introduction (∧I) to reach the goal of the proof.
P. D. Magnus, Tim Button with additions by J. Robert Loftis remixed and revised by Aaron Thomas-Bolduc, Richard Zach, forallx Calgary Remix: An Introduction to Formal Logic, Winter 2018. http://forallx.openlogicproject.org/