Date of Filing      : 10.10.2018

                                                                                                                       Date of Disposal: 29.03.2019

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

THIRUVALLUR-1

PRESENT:     THIRU.J.JUSTIN DAVID M.A., M.L.,                                       :   PRESIDENT

                        TMT.K.PRAMEELA, M.COM.,                                      :   MEMBER I

                      THIRU. D.BABU VARADHARAJAN B.sc., B.L.,           :  MEMBER –II

CC No.44/2018

FRIDAY, THE 29^th  DAY OF MARCH 2019

A.Kesavalu Naidu,

S/o.A.Babusamy Naidu,

Ammaneri Post, (Via) R.K.Pet,

Pallipattu Taluk,

Thiruvallur District - 631 303.                                 ……. Complainant.

//VS//

The Branch Manager,

Canara Bank, Thadur Branch,

Tiruttani -Chittor High Road,

K.G.Kandigai, Thruttani Taluk,

Tiruvallur District.                                                          ……. Opposite party                             

This complaint has been remanded back to this Forum as per the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai, in F.A.No.289/2017, dated 03.09.2018, and taken on the file of this Forum and posted on 10.10.2018 and coming upon before us finally on 15.03.2019 in the presence of M/s.K.Sivakumar & J.Sudhakar counsel for the complainant and opposite party was set ex-parte and after perusing the proof affidavit of the complainant and the documents and hearing the argument of the complainant, this Forum delivered the following.

ORDER

PRONOUNCED BY THIRU.J.JUSTIN DAVID, PRESIDENT

 This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party for seeking relief to issue NOC for the Tractor loan in TL No.5/86 and to return the pledged land original documents along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- and cost of Rs.10,000/-.

2. The brief facts of the complaint:  is as follows:-

The complainant is the younger brother of A.Loganatha Naidu and they jointly availed Tractor loan in TL.No.5/86 for a sum of Rs.77,000/- from the opposite party during December 1986.  At that time, they have pledged land documents for security to the opposite party bank.  Both of them were in joint family in 1986.  The complainant later allowed his brother to take care of the tractor to use the tractor for cultivation.  Due to the family problems in 1989, both of them were partitioned their properties and they came out of the joint family arrangement.  During partition, A.Loganatha Naidu requested the complainant to keep the tractor and he will pay the entire loan amount availed from the opposite party bank and the same was agreed by the complainant.  After that, the complainant not interacted with his brother.  Thereafter in 1992the opposite party bank has filed a suit on OS.No.144/1992 against the complainant and his younger brother to recover the Tractor loan, TL.No.5/86.  Whenever, the complainant received summon from the court, he went to the bank and informed about their partition and their oral agreement between them.  The bank Manager understood the situation and advised the complainant not to appear in the case and thereafter, finally the opposite party bank fully recovered the entire loan amount from his brother A.Loganatha Naidu.  The opposite party accepted that their land original document is in their custody before the court during the trial.  The complainant recently came to know the above information from the opposite party bank that they have recovered the entire loan amount for TL.No.5/86 and the opposite party bank was given a NOC to A.Loganatha Naidu on 29.09.2014, who is the second borrower in the said loan. Though the complainant is the first borrower, he was neglected to give the NOC and also they were not returned the pledged documents.  Therefore the complainant had sent legal notice to the opposite party bank on 02.10.2016 by requesting to issue NOC in the said loan account and to return the pledged land original documents with the stipulated time.  Though they have received the legal notice, till now, there is no reply from the opposite party bank.

3. In spite of notice duly served to the opposite party from this forum, the opposite party neither appeared nor represent through counsel though sufficient opportunity is given.  Hence the opposite party was set ex-party.

4. On the side of the complainant, the complainant filed proof affidavit in order to substantiate his case and Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 are marked on his side. 

5. In such circumstances, this forum decided to conclude this matter fully on merits with available evidence and documents putforth before this forum though the opposite party was set ex-parte.

6. At this juncture, the point for determination before this forum is as follows:-

(1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

(2) Whether the opposite party is liable to issue NOC to the complainant?

(3) Whether the opposite party is liable to return the original pledged land documents to the complainant?

(4) Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation and cost of proceedings from the opposite party?

(5) To what other reliefs, the complainant is entitled?

7. Point Nos.1 to 4:-

The case of the complainant is that the complainant and his younger brother A.Loganatha Naidu, jointly availed Tractor loan in TL.No.5/86 for a sum of Rs.77,000/- from the opposite party during December 1986.  At that time, they have provided the land documents for security to the opposite party bank.  A.Loganatha Naidu requested the complainant to keep the tractor with him and he will pay the entire loan amount availed from the opposite party bank and the same was agreed by the complainant.  But complainant’s younger brother A.Loganatha Naidu has not paid the loan amount.  Thereafter in 1992 the opposite party bank has filed a suit in OS.No.144/1992 against the complainant and his younger brother to recover the Tractor loan, TL.No.5/86 and the entire loan amount recovered by the opposite party bank.  But the opposite party so far not returned the pledged land document and therefore the complainant suffered mental agony due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

8. The complainant filed this complaint before this forum originally on 03.04.2017 and this forum before taking the case on file, passed an order dated 07.07.2017 stating this complaint is barred by limitation and thereby this complaint is dismissed.  Against this order, the complainant preferred FA.No.289/2017 before State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai-3.  The Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission passed an order dated 03.09.2018 set aside the order passed by this forum and directed this forum to take the complaint on file and disposed the case on merits.  As per order of the SCDRC this forum took the complaint on file on 10.10.2018 and issued notice to the opposite party, the opposite party in spite of receipt of notice not appeared before this forum and therefore the opposite party was set ex-party on 12.11.2018.

9. The complainant and his younger brother A.Loganatha Naidu, jointly availed Tractor loan in TL.No.5/86 for a sum of Rs.77,000/- from the opposite party during December 1986.  Ex.A1 is the reply given by the opposite party in a requested made by one Mr.Nandha Gopal under the RTI Act. In which, it is stated that the date of grant of loan, the date of sanction of loan is 26.12.1986 and the loan amount withdrawn on 26.12.1986.  Further as per Ex.A2 the above said loan was not closed till 18.05.2011.  Thereafter the outstanding loan amount was cleared.  Ex.A4 is the letter issued by the opposite party in favour of the complainant’s younger brother namely A.Loganatha Naidu dated 29.09.2014.  In Ex.A4 it is stated as follows:-

WE HEREBY INFORM YOU THAT YOU HAD BEEN AVAILED TRACTOR LOAN WITH THE CO OBLIGANT OF MR.KESAVALU NAIDU, S/O. BABUSWAMY NAIDU, B MADURAPURAM, PALLIPET. THE SUBJECT LOAN IS NOT OUTSTANDING IN OUR REGORDS.  HENCE THERE IS NO DUES WITH US

10. Therefore as per Ex.A4 there is no outstanding amount for the tractor loan and the loan was closed before 2014.  Hence the complainant filed this consumer complaint for return of the original land document pledged with the opposite party bank at the time of availing tractor loan.

 The opposite party has filed a suit in OS.No.144/92 for recovery of tractor loan outstanding amount before sub-court, kanchipuram.  Ex.A3 is the copy deposition by the Manager of the opposite party on 10.08.1996 before Sub Court, Kanchipuram, in that deposition during transaction,  Mr.M.Sekar, Manager of the opposite party’s bank  deposition as follows:-

jhthf; fld; nrhj;J nghWg;GWjpapd; gb nfhLf;fg;gl;lJ.  jhthf; fld;fs; gj;jpu xg;gilg;G mlkhdk; gpujpthjpfshy; nra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ.  muf;Nfhzj;jpy; gj;jpu xg;gilg;G nra;ag;gl;lJ.  mt;thW epyq;fs; mlkhdkhf itf;fg;gl;lJ. mt;thW mlkhdk; nra;J nfhLf;fg;gl;l nrhj;Jf;fs; gs;spg;gl;L tl;lk; kJuhGuk; fpuhkj;jpy; cs;sd.  mt;thW vt;tsT Vf;fu; epyk; mlkhdk; nra;J nfhLf;fg;gl;lJ vd;gJ Qhgfkpy;iy. k.rh.M.2 Njjpf;F Kd;du; gj;jpuq;fis gpujpthjpf;F xg;gilj;jhu;fs;.  mt;thW 1, 2 gpujpthjpfs; xg;gilj;jhu;fs;.  me;j gj;jpuq;fs; vq;fs; tq;fpf; fpisapy; ,Uf;fpd;wd.

11. Hence, as per the evidence of the opposite party’s Bank Manager, it is crystal clear that the original land document of the complainant with the opposite party’s bank custody.  The opposite party bank so far not return the original land document to the complainant even after receipt of the entire tractor loan outstanding.  It is the duty of the opposite party to issue NOC of the borrower after closing of tractor loan amount and also opposite party is liable to return the original land documents to the borrower immediately on closing the loan amount.  But here in this complaint the opposite party neither issued No objection Certificate nor returned the pledged original land documents to the complainant even after closing the tractor loan and the above attitude of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service.  The complainant also suffered mental agony due to non return of pledged loan document by the opposite party to the complainant.  Under these circumstances the opposite party is liable to issue No objection Certificate to the complainant and also liable to return the pledged original land documents to the complainant. Further the complainant also entitled for compensation of Rs.5,000/- for causing mental agony to the complainant due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and also the complainant is entitled for cost of Rs.3,000/- from the opposite party. Thus the point Nos.1 to 4 are answered accordingly.

12. Point No.5:-

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  Accordingly, the Opposite Party is directed to issue No Objection Certificate regarding Tractor Loan TL No.5/86 and to return the original document pledged at the time of availing Tractor Loan TL No.5/86 to the complainant within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.  Further the opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards compensation for causing mental agony  due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and also to pay a sum Rs.3,000/-(Rupees Three thousand only) towards cost of this litigation to the complainant. 

The above amount shall be payable by the opposite party within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum till the date of payment.

Dictated directly by the president to the steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by him, correct by the president and pronounced by us in the open Forum of this the 29^thday of March 2019.

    -Sd-                                                      -Sd-                                                  -Sd-

 MEMBER-II                                    MEMBER-I                                     PRESIDENT

List of document filed by the complainant:-

            -Sd-                                           -Sd-                                                      -Sd-

    MEMBER-II                              MEMBER-I                                       PRESIDENT