Order No.                 .

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

          Complainants by filing this complaint has submitted that on 17-04-2013 he went through one advertisement circulated by a bank official of the OP Bank wherefrom they came to learn that a flat is going to be sold in auction on reserved price of Rs.13 lakhs by the Canara Bank and for that purpose as an intended purchaser complainants demanded relevant papers and documents of the aforesaid property but bank official refused rather requested the complainants to participate in the auction process by depositing an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- and if complainants are found selected as successful bidder the bank will show the required title related papers of the flat in question.  Accordingly, being satisfied about the assurance made by the OP Bank complainants had deposited an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- only equivalent to 10% of the aforesaid reserved price of the said flat by virtue of a bank draft drawn on dated 20-05-2013 in favour of the Canara Bank, the OP on 20-05-2013 on submission of the said bank draft in favour of the OP herein, the said Canara Bank had issued notice dated 21-05-2013 from their Recoveries and Legal Section Circle Office, Kolkata to the complainants informing that complainants have been selected as the highest bidder for auction of the property was informed that complainants were instructed to deposit 15% of the bid amount i.e. Rs.1,95,501/- on or before 22-05-2013 otherwise the said EMD amount would be forfeited.

          Accordingly, the highest bidding amount of the aforesaid property was fixed at Rs.13,02,001/- and as per direction of the OP complainants again deposited Rs.1,95,501/- by cash thus, equivalent to 15% of the bidding amount directly at the cash counter of the OP on 22-05-2013.

          Thereafter, complainant visited the concerned Bowbazar Branch of the OP and had communicated with the Branch Manager of the said Bank for perusal of the necessary papers and documents of the aforesaid property to be purchased by the complainants but after perusal of the said documents complainants observed that Bank officials issued notification for sale in respect of the property describing it as ALL THAT ONE FLAT but in the sanctioned plan itself there was no demarcation of such area as the flat area rather on enquiring about the said matter complainants came to know that as per sanctioned plan it was a car parking space but OP declared it as a flat for auction sale. 

          After knowing about the status of the alleged flat complainants expressed their inconvenience to the concerned Branch Manager of the OP and also informed the OP that after purchase they shall have to face lot of problems in mutating the unauthorized flat from the concerned authority since there is no existence of flat as per sanctioned plan as it is nothing but a car parking space and accordingly, they had expressed their unwillingness to proceed for purchase and registration and to deposit the balance amount to the OP.  Thereafter, complainants sent notice date 31-05-2013 addressing to the Branch Manager of the OP as well as to the Chairman and Managing Director of the said Canara Bank and also to the Authorized Officer, Recovery and Legal Section of the Bank through speed post with A/D and the said notices were duly received by the OP.  OP finally sent an intimation dated 22-06-2013 expressing their intention to refund the bidding amount of Rs.3,25,501/- which was paid and deposited by the complainants.

          Accordingly, on receipt of the said intimation from the OP complainants further sent another notice on 01-08-2013 to the OP stating their view and subsequently, issued another notice stating their view and subsequently, OP refused to pay any interest over the said amount but practically for giving false publication in the advertisement as was published on 17-04-2013 complainants were practically deceived and for the laches and negligence on the part of the Bank officials of the OP, particularly for the serious loss of their efforts and mental pain and agony by investing such amount and for which complainant has prayed for redressal and also for compensation along with said amount.

          On the contrary, the Bank Authority by filing written statement submitted complainants voluntarily after perusal of all terms and condition as laid down by the authorized officer of the OP Bank in the said sale notice, vide their letter dated 20-05-2013 addressed to the Manager, Canara Bank, Bowbazar Branch had expressed their willingness to purchase the said flat as per the aforesaid advertisement and accordingly paid such amount.  Moreover,  in the said publication or advertisement it is specifically mentioned “AS IS WHERE IS AND AS IS WHAT IS” and said flat would be sold as it is and as per the documents available with the bank, being the highest bidder complainants deposited 15% of the sale price total amount of Rs.3,55,501/- and on receipt of the letters from the complainants on 31-05-2013 and 01-08-2013 OP replied on 22-06-2013 and 14-08-2013 and thereby, very clearly stating that since the said flat was proposed to be sold in “AS IS WHERE IS AND AS IS WHAT IS” basis and when complainants are unwilling to purchase OP Bank requested to take refund of their amount amounting to Rs.3,25,501/- and for which OP had no negligence and deficiency on the part of the OP and there was no laches on the part of the OP for which the present complaint should be dismissed and moreover, as per clause and terms of the conditions of the notification complainants are not entitled to any interest.

Decision with Reasons

On introspective study of the written statement and the complaint including the entire materials on record and after hearing the Ld. Lawyers of both the parties we have gathered that no doubt the OP Bank published advertisement for sale of the present property as flat on the ground floor of a multi-complex building and complainants after observing the said advertisement went to the Bank and as intended purchaser and as per order of the OP deposited initially sum of Rs.1,30,000/-.  Thereafter, Rs.1,95,501/- and by that way he totally deposited a sum of Rs.3,25,501/- but fact remains at that time OP Bank did not supply the material document in respect of the said flat but after depositing of the total amount of Rs.3,25,501/- complainants requested the OP Bank to verify the documents related to the total status of the flat and after proper inspection of the complainants searched out that on the ground floor as per the sanctioned plan there is no flat but it was a car parking space but most interesting factor is that bank authority in their advertisement for auction sale described the said property as a flat but in reality the sanctioned plan does not confirm the same when that matter was reported to the banking authority, they failed to give any satisfactory reason and complainants came to learn from Municipality in respect of the plan as described in the notification shall not be mutated if anyone purchases it because it is a car parking space so, complainants expressed their unwillingness to purchase the same and asked the OP for refund and OP ultimately reported the complainant that they are willing to refund the sum without any interest.

          Now, the complainant’s grievance is that the Banking Authority knowing fully well about the status of that property so called flat as a car parking space tried to sell out in auction as a flat that is no doubt a laches and negligence on the part of the OP and practically complainants were misguided by the false publication about the status of that property as flat.  Fact remains Op has not denied the status of the property as per sanctioned plan a car parking space then the question is for what reason the OP authority published such advertisement describing that ground floor as flat that means only for the purpose of collecting money by selling such fake flat to the customer they tried to save their own interest and that act as done by the OP Bank is no doubt unfair trade practice and for which invariably the complainants are entitled to some interest when the total amount of Rs.3,25,501/- was deposited by the complainants and as per direction of the OP and it was in the custody of the OP and it was invested in Banking business then invariably minimum interest must be give n to the complainants because complainant was deceived by the OP for their false declaration or description and advertisement as made in that particular advertisement dated 176-04-2013.  So, from the very beginning it is clear that in the advertisement some misleading description in respect of the alleged flat was given by the OP though OP was aware of the fact that it is not a flat but it is car parking space then for giving false declaration about the alleged flat complainant has been harassed and for which the Banking authority shall have to give 6% interest over the said amount since the date of deposit of the said money and till its full payment by the OP to the complainant and that is the rules in respect of deposit of any advance amount and when in this case advance amount was paid as per false and fabricated description as given by the OP then invariably OP shall have to compensate 6% interest over the said amount when OP is willing to refund and that has been reported to the complainants. 

In the result, the case succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP with a cost of Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two thousand only).

          OP is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,25,501/- along with interest @6% p.a. over the sum since the date of its deposit and till its full payment of the same along with interest and same shall be paid within one month from the date of this order failing which for non-compliance of the Forum’s order OP shall have to pay punitive damages @Rs.300/- per day till full satisfaction of the decree and if the punitive damages is collected that shall be deposited to this Forum.

          OP is hereby directed to comply this order within stipulated period of time, if any reluctant attitude is found and for non compliance of the forum’s order OP shall be even penalized and proceeding will be started against him u/s.27 of the C.P. Act.