JUDGEMENT

          Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that he took a financial assistance from the Retail Asset Centre, IDBI Bank under home loan scheme keeping his an original deed of gift in Bengali language with blue print site plan attached with the deed dated 24.04.1991 registered with the Additional District Sub-Registrar, Bidhan Nagar, Salt Lake City being No. 3219 for the year 1991 duly executed by the father of the complainant Sri Phani Bhusan Roy in new condition along with other required necessary papers, guarantor etc as per bank’s regulation to complete his house.

          Thereafter on 08.10.2011 complainant paid a sum of Rs. 2,07,602/- only and foreclosed his loan account vide Foreclosure A/c No. 815675100010520 and after remitting the entire amount, complainant demanded his above mortgaged deed from the op no.1 when op no.1 told the complainant to come after 15 days when the bank will return the mortgaged deed and paper along with no outstanding certificate and accordingly the complainant agreed but after the lapse of the said 15 days when the complainant went to the office of the ops to get return of his said mortgaged deed, the ops intend to deliver a deed which has been eaten up by white ants and the complainant was surprised to see his most valuable document in damaged condition and straight way refused to accept/return the mortgaged document.

          Complainant at the time of taking home loan from the ops fulfilled all the formalities of the IDBI Bank Ltd. as per their banking norms and the op after taking the original title deed of the complainant disbursed the home loan amount to the complainant and accordingly it is obvious that as soon as the loan amount will be remitted, the borrower will get back his mortgaged document from the bank, but unfortunately due to serious negligence on the part of the op the complainant not yet received his original documents in its actual condition.

          But practically op at the time of delivery of the said document handed over a mutilated documents which was eaten by white ants but banking authority expressed that they are not in a position to return the original documents except that document to the complainant for its present condition and also created pressure upon the complainant to take back the said damaged documents in respect of a new condition original document and they also threatened the complainant that if he refuses to take back the document, IDBI Bank Ltd. will not issue no outstanding certificate in favour of the complainant and complainant ultimately refused to take back the damaged documents and op intimated that the said documents was kept in water proof sealed covered transmitted to the courier to the Central Processing unit of the IDBI Bank at Mumbai for keeping it in safe custody fire proof vaults and there was no laches on the part of the op.  But for the negative attitude of the complainant, complainant did not receive for which there was no negligence and deficiency on the part of the op. 

          In the above circumstances complainant has tried to pray for compensation and for returning the mortgage of deed etc.

          On the other hand op by filing this written version submitted that no doubt mortgage deed of Gift was deposited with the Bank for creation of Equitable Mortgage as security towards repayment of the Housing Loan A/c No. 815675100010520 and no doubt the said amount has been repaid by the complainant and complainant was asked to collect the original documents including the Deed of Gift dated 24.04.1991from the Bank vide its intimation dated 20.01.2012.  But the complainant did not receive the same but actually end bottom pages have been damaged and physical changes of the original deed has not been made and it is not being mutilated and damaged by white ants as alleged and op again and again tried to return the documents to complainant and to take back the documents but complainant refused to take back the documents.

          Fact remains complainant through his Ld. Advocate made the complaint against the Bank with Reserve Bank of India regarding mutilation of his original deed and it was observed by Mr. P.P. Biswas, Nodal Officer of Bank that there no damage was caused to material alleged Deed which was verified by the Banks Regional Operation Manager (ROM) and found that the end on papers of the deed attached to the stamp papers were slightly folded at the lower edges, while the three stamp papers are intact and the document was never damaged by white ants etc.  Further RBI vide its letter dated 18.03.2014 addressed to the Nodal Officer of IDBI Bank directed the Bank to return the original deed along with certified copy of the deed within one month from the date of the letter i.e. 18.03.2014 and Bank in compliance of the RBI’s direction issued a letter dated 24.03.2014 to the complainant requesting him to collect the original documents and a certified copy of the deed from this office.

          Thereafter Bank by another letter dated 05.04.2014 again requested the complainant to collect the original property papers but complainant has not responded.  In fact for the purpose of grabbing some money this false case is filed and there is no material in this case for which this complaint should be dismissed.

                                                        Decision with reasons

          On proper consideration of the complaint and particularly the vital allegation about the original deed which was deposited by the complainant to the op at the time of taking loan has been mutilated and damaged by white ants, this Forum directed the ops to produce the original deed and on the date of argument that was produced by the op in a plastic cover which was opened and it was found that the deed is intact and there was no mutilation, no damage except edges of bottom portion is partly damaged.  But it is damaged due to the poor quality of the said papers which has been used at the time of preparing the deed.  But the other portions are intact and in fact the entire allegation as made by the complainant is false and fabricated, not only that in previous occasion, complainant lodged the complaint to Ombudsman and RBI who also decided the same stating the fact that the allegation of the complainant is baseless.  But even then Ombudsman directed to the op to hand over that original deed along with certified copy.  Op prepared the same and asked the complainant to receive it but complainant did not accept and considering that fact it is clear that this consumer is not a genuine consumer, genuine relief seeker but only for the purpose of grabbing money this false case is filed.

          In this context we want to mention a very vital theorization of many Consumer Researchers including Nobel Laurate Arthur Simon who have already theorized that the consumer’s behavior is a very vital factor in respect of the Consumerism and also in respect of getting redressal from any Forum.  Honest approach of the consumer before the Forum is a sinenonqua to get the relief.  But in the present case painfully we are expressing that the entire complaint is baseless and without any foundation and only for the purpose of grabbing some money this complaint is filed.

          Accordingly this complaint fails.

          Hence, it is

                                                               ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is dismissed on contest but without any cost against the op.

          But complainant is directed to receive the said deed along with certified copy and also collect the no outstanding certificate from the op and op is directed to issue the same without any further delay.