JUDGEMENT

          Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that complainant took House Building Loan in the year 2002 vide Loan Account No. 1113323904 with an instruction given that the said loan to be adjusted by installment of Rs.1,000/- per month deducting from the complainant’s account being account No.1008778032 and the complainant’s original deed was taken against the said loan on 13.02.2002 as security.

          But suddenly complainant came to learn from the Chief Manager of Central Bank of India, Shyambazar branch on 11.07.2012 that there is no security available with them and complainant was asked to close the said loan account by depositing the outstanding amount of Rs.31,000/- and against that complainant sent a letter on 25.07.2012 to Chief Manager seeking consideration of the payment of loan dues by installment of Rs.3,000/- and also requested the Chief Manager to find out the original deed of complainant as early as possible for return.

          Accordingly the House Building Loan was closed on 24.12.2012 and thereafter moreover 3 & ½ months have passed from the date of closure of said loan account the original deed of complainant has not yet been handed over and in that case complainant wrote a letter on 25.05.2013 to the Chief Manager (North) demanding his original deed but surprisingly no positive result was received.  Thereafter the entire matter was drawn to the notice to the Chairman of Central Bank of India through a letter dated 09.06.2013 but all are in vain.

          Lastly complainant sent a letter to the Chief Manager, Shyambazar branch to deliver ‘clearance of no outstanding certificate’ on 10.06.2013 and the same was received by complainant on 11.06.2013 but till date the original deed of same has not yet been returned and finding no other alternative complainant sent a demand notice through his Ld. Advocate on 26.01.2013 but there is no result.  So, in the above circumstances for negligent and deficient manner of service, this complaint is filed for redressal.

          On the other hand op/bank by filing written version submitted that no doubt complainant deposited his original Title Deed being No.2208 for the year 1984 as a co-lateral security to the bank with intention to create mortgage.  Subsequently bank has created mortgage on the property mentioned in the schedule of the Title Deed being no. 2208 for the year 1984 and made entry in the mortgage registrar.  But in the month of July, 2012, on scrutiny bank could not trace out the said original Title Deed being No.2208 for the year 1984 of complainant in the file and or record.

          Immediately bank informed about the lack of security to the borrower on 11.07.2012 and accordingly borrower paid the total dues to the bank and said house building loan account was closed and subsequently bank issued ‘no dues’ certificate and the said borrower is ex-employee of the bank made personal representation to the bank and also wrote letter to the Regional Manager and Branch Manager of the Central Bank and also requested to return back his original Title Deed being No.2208 of the year 1984 and bank authority is still in searching out the said Ttile Deed and verbally assured its ex-employee to keep patient about the return of the Deed and op never refused to the borrower but denied all other allegations and further submitted that there is no intention of the bank to harass the complainant but complainant filed this complaint only to harass the bank, bank has taken all positive steps to search out the same but as yet it has not been searched out and if it is found then same shall be handed over.  So, the present complaint should be dismissed.

                                                   Decision with reasons

          After hearing the Ld. Lawyers of both the parties and also considering the complaint and written version and it is undisputed fact that the complainant is an ex-employee of the present bank and no doubt he took loan in the year 2002 being account No.1113323904.  It is also admitted fact that the said account has already been closed on 24.12.2012 because entire dues of the loan has been paid by the complainant and no dues certificate has already been received and complainant received the same on 11.06.2013.  It is also admitted fact that a Title Deed bearing no.2208 in the year 1948 was deposited by the complainant to the bank and bank has taken it and no doubt complainant is entitled to get back it when the loan account has already been closed in the year 2012.  But op has admitted that they failed to trace out the same for which it cannot be returned to the complainant as yet.  But they are trying to search out.

          So, it is clear from the entire written statement that complainant is entitled to get back the said original Title Deed of the complainant in respect of his property being Deed No.2208 for the year 1984 which is still in the custody of the and no doubt op even after closure of the said loan account in the year 2012 issued no dues certificate in favour of the complainant but has not returned the said original Title Deed being No.2208 in the year 1984 and most interesting factor is that it was taken by the op and it is in their custody.  Bank is the responsible authority who deals with crores of rupees daily, they have their strong room etc. but most interesting factor is that such a bank authority (op) has failed to search out the original Title Deed of the complainant and it is peculiar that op did not send any letter to the complainant informing that it is not traceable and no such letter was also sent to the complainant that op is trying to take a certified copy of the original deed of the complainant and they shall have to supply the certified copy to the complainant.  So, considering that fact it is found that responsible bank institution (op) has opted no doubt in deficient manner of service and in this case the sincerity in keeping the documents of the customers by the bank is very much hopeless. 

          So, it is proved there is/was negligent act on the part of the op and no doubt such a service is deficient in manner and deficiency o the op is proved from their own written version and it is unfortunate that for last 2 or 3 years op has taken no alternative to return the certificate copy of the deed and such an act on the part of the bank institution is no doubt uncalled for, immoral and at the same time callous in nature and the written version reveals the callous activities of the bank administration.

          But anyhow the complainant has been able to prove that deficiency in service and negligence on the part of the op in rendering service to the complainant and no doubt complainant is entitled to get back the original deed and from the op and if op fails to search out the same in that case op shall have to report to the complainant by writing a letter that it has not been traced and if they are willing after collecting from the registrar authority at their own cost and supply it.  But that had not been done.  So we are confirmed that deficiency and negligence of service on the part of the op is proved.

          Accordingly, the complaint succeeds.

          Hence, it is

                                                         ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest with cost of Rs.2,000/- against the ops.

          Ops are directed to hand over and return the original Title Deed of the complainant which is in the custody of the op within 15 days from the date of this order and if op fails to search out the same in that case op shall have to collect the certified copy of the said deed at their own cost from the registering authority and to hand over it along with ops certificate that they fail to hand over the original as it is lost or not traceable in the bank custody so the certified copy is being handed over to the complainant and said part order shall be complied by the bank within one month from the date of this order but even after op is found that they are unable to comply that order in that case op shall have to pay punitive damages of Rs.10,000/- which shall be paid to this Forum.

          For causing mental pain and agony and also for harassing the complainant in such a manner for many years even after closure of the account satisfactorily ops shall have to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.

          Ops are directed to comply the order within one month from the date of this order failing which penal action shall be started against them as per provision 27 of C.P. Act 1986 and further penalty shall be imposed after starting final prosecution against the ops.

          Ops are directed to follow the order very strictly otherwise stern steps shall be taken against op for their reluctant attitude and for disobeyance of the Forum’s order.