BEFORE THE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD
F.A.No.620 of 2013 AGAINST C.C.No.749 of 2011, DISTRICT FORUM – III, Hyderabad
Between
Indian Overseas Bank, Hyderabad Main Branch
Rep. by its Asst. General Manager
Smt. B. Gowri Kanakadurga,
W/o Sri B. Vinay Bhushan,
D. No.51-664,665 & 679
Ground floor, Surabhi Arcade,
Bank Street, Koti, Hyderabad .. Appellant/opposite party
And
01 Sri K. Bal Reddy,
S/oK. Butchi Reddy
Aged 65 years, Pensioner
02 Smt. K. Vasundhara, W/o K. Bal Reddy
Aged 64 years, Household
Both are R/o 8-4-17/34, Kranthi nagar
Karmanghat, Saroornagar Mandal, R. R. District. .. Respondents/complainants
Counsel for the Appellant : M/s. T. V. K. Murthy
Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. B. Vijaysen Reddy
QUORUM:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, HON’BLE PRESIDENT
AND
SRI R. LAKSHMINARASIMHA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER
Friday, the Thirteenth day of June
TWO THOUSAND FOURTEEN
Oral Order ( As per R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Hon’ble Member)
***
01. The opposite party is the appellant. The appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum passed in CC No. 749 of 2011 on 12.02.2013.
02. The facts of the case as seen from the averments of the complaint are that the first respondent availed housing loan from the appellant bank and the second respondent is the guarantor for discharge of the loan. The respondent no. 1 deposited title deed of the house bearing No. 8-4-17/34, for the purpose of availing the loan. The first respondent discharged the entire loan in the month of April, 2009. As the documents were not returned, he got issued notice dated 19.04.2010 stating that misplacing of the documents by the appellant caused irreparable loss to them as they were unable to sell the property or make transactions in any other manner without the original title deeds.
03. The appellant resisted the claim on the premise that the respondent no. 1 availed the loan under loan account No. 270100022 by creating equitable mortgage by depositing of title deed. The appellant has contended that the branch office of the bank was shifted to another location and during the process of shifting, the original title deed of the first respondent was misplaced and despite the efforts made by the appellant, the document was not traceable and the appellant is ready to issue certificate to the effect that the original title deed of the respondent no. 1 was misplaced.
04. The first respondent filed his affidavit, Ex. A-1 to A5 and the Assistant General Manager of the appellant filed his affidavit and the appellant had not chosen to file and documents.
05. The point for consideration is whether the order of the District Forum is vitiated by misappreciation of facts or law ?
06. The first respondent is the principal borrower who availed loan to the tune of Rs. 6 lakhs by depositing the title deed of his house bearing No. 8-4-17/34 and the second respondent is the guarantor to the loan transaction. The respondent no. 1 discharged the loan on 24.08.2009. His request for return of the documents was kept pending by the appellant bank on the premise of the documents being misplaced while its office was shifted to another location.
07. The respondent no. 1 got issued notice on 19.04.2010 with a request to the appellant to return the title deed for which there was no response from the appellant bank. The appellant bank failed to return the title deed to the respondents and its failure therefor amounts to deficiency in service on its part.
08. The title deed kept as security for repayment of the loan could not be traced for such a long time which goes to draw inference that the document is lost while it was in the custody of the appellant. On account of loss of the document, the respondent would be at a disadvantageous position in the matter of sale of the house or availing the loan by way of mortgaging the house property.
09. On a certificate from the appellant bank to the effect the title deed is loss while it was kept in its custody, the respondents can avail loan from the appellant or any other bank. They can also sell the house property basing on the certificate from the appellant. However, the difficulty in selling the property without the title deed gains innumerable dimensions as the prospective purchaser is not convinced in the same manner as the bank in the matter of sanctioning the loan. The District Forum awarded 20% of the market value of the house property, Rs.6,26,520/- besides granting compensation of Rs. One lakh and directing the appellant to issue certificate as also publication of notice to the effect that the title deed was lost while it was in its custody. It appears that the District Forum has not taken into consideration of the relevant factors while awarding the compensation to the respondents.
10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court “State of Gujarath vs ShantilalMangaldas” AIR 1969 SC 634. Held the compensation to mean”…..In ordinary parlance the expression compensation means anything given to make things equivalent; a thing given to or to make amends for loss recompense, remuneration or pay, it need not therefore necessarily in terms of money. The phraseology of the Constitutional provision also indicates that compensation need not necessarily be in terms of money because it expressly provides that the law may specify the principles on which, and the manner in which , compensation is to be determined and given . If it were to be in terms of money along, the expression ‘paid’ would have been more appropriate”.
11. The Supreme Court held that the compensation to be awarded is to be fair and reasonable. In “Charan Singh vs Healing Touch Hospital and others”2000SAR(Civil) 935 the Apex Court stressed the need of balancing between the compensation awarded recompensing the consumer and the change it brings in the attitude of the service provider. The Court held “While quantifying damages , consumer forums are required to make an attempt to serve ends of justice so that compensation is awarded, in an established case, which not only serves the purpose of recompensing the individual, but which also at the same time aims to bring about a qualitative change in the attitude of the service provider. Indeed calculation of damages depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. No hard and fast rule can be laid down for universal application. While awarding compensation, a Consumer Forum has to take into account all relevant factors and assess compensation on the basis of accepted legal principles, on moderation. It is for the Consumer Forum to grant compensation to the extent it finds it reasonable, fair and proper in the facts and circumstances of a given case according to established judicial standards where the claimant is able to establish his charge”.
12. In view of the principle laid in the aforementioned cases, the award of an amount of Rs.6,26,520/- towards compensation on account of loss of the title deed appears to be on higher side particularly when a sum of Rs. One lakh has been granted towards compensation for the respondent no.1 suffering mental tension. As such, this Commission is inclined to reduce the amount of Rs.6,26,520/- awarded as compensation for loss of the title deed to Rs.3,00,000/- ( Rupees Three Lakhs only ) and maintain the other reliefs awarded in favour of the respondents.
13. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed modifying the order of the District Forum. The amount of Rs. 6,26,520/- is scaled down to Rs.3,00,000/- ( Rupees Three Lakhs only ). The rest of the order is confirmed. There shall be no separate order as to costs. Time for compliance four weeks.
PRESIDENT
MEMBER DATED : 13.06.2014.
