Order by:
Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President
1. This Consumer Complaint has been received by transfer vide order dated 26.11.2021 of Hon’ble President, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab at Chandigarh under section 48 of CPA Act, vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2021 from District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana to District Consumer Commission, Moga to decide the same in Camp Court at Ludhiana and said order was ordered to be affected from 14th March, 2022.
2. The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (now section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) on the allegations that the complainant availed loan from the Opposite Parties amounting to Rs.5 lakhs vide loan account No. 1370605 by pledging his sale deed bearing vasika No. 13887 dated 04.10.2011 and 7 blank cheques and other relevant documents with Opposite Party No.1. Further alleges that the complainant has paid the entire loan amount of Rs.4,44,492/- on 19.08.2017 with Opposite Parties and in this regard, the Opposite Party No.1 also issued receipt No. 383261 dated 19.08.2017 regarding the above said loan amount and now nothing is due against the complainant. The complainant made so many requests to the Opposite Parties to return the original sale deed alongwith blank cheque and other relevant documents, but the Opposite Parties did not respond. As such, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.
a) The Opposite Parties may be directed to hand over the original sale deed and seven blank signed cheques alongwith other documents to the complainant and also to pay Rs.30,000/- on account of compensation for causing him mental tension and Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses and also to pay any other relief to which this District Consumer Commission may deem fit be also granted.
3. Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed as the complainant has attempted to misguide and mislead this District Consumer Commission. It is submitted that the complainant alongwith his brother Iqbal Singh have approached the Opposite Parties and availed the loan of Rs.5 lakhs by pledging the documents as security, but without the consent of the other co-borrower i.e. Iqbal Singh, the original property papers can not be released to the complainant. Since the property mortgaged with the Opposite Parties is in the joint name of complainant and his brother Iqbal Singh and hence, the complainant was many a times asked by Opposite Parties to bring his brother Iqbal Singh alongwith him for receiving the original documents from the Opposite Parties, but the complainant failed to do so and has rather filed the present complaint just in order to harass the Opposite Parties. On merits, the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 took up almost the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections and hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
4. In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1 and Ex.CW2 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
5. On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 also tendered into evidence the affidavit of Ex.R1 alongwith copy of document Ex.R2 and close the evidence.
6. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and also gone through the documents placed on record.
7. Ld.counsel for the Complainants as well as ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 has mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint as well as in their written statement respectively. We have perused the rival contention of the ld.counsel for the parties. The case of the complainant is that he availed loan from the Opposite Parties amounting to Rs.5 lakhs vide loan account No. 1370605 by pledging his sale deed bearing vasika No. 13887 dated 04.10.2011 and 7 blank cheques and other relevant documents with Opposite Party No.1. Further alleges that the complainant has paid the entire loan amount of Rs.4,44,492/- on 19.08.2017 with Opposite Parties and in this regard, the Opposite Party No.1 also issued receipt No. 383261 dated 19.08.2017 regarding the above said loan amount and now nothing is due against the complainant. The complainant made so many requests to the Opposite Parties to return the original sale deed alongwith blank cheque and other relevant documents, but the Opposite Parties did not respond and as such, the deficiency in service is writ large on the part of the Opposite arties. On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties has repelled the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant and contended that the complainant alongwith his brother Iqbal Singh have approached the Opposite Parties and availed the loan of Rs.5 lakhs by pledging the documents as security, but without the consent of the other co-borrower i.e. Iqbal Singh, the original property papers can not be released to the complainant. Since the property mortgaged with the Opposite Parties is in the joint name of complainant and his brother Iqbal Singh and hence, the complainant was many a times asked by Opposite Parties to bring his brother Iqbal Singh alongwith him for receiving the original documents from the Opposite Parties, but the complainant failed to do so and has rather filed the present complaint just in order to harass the Opposite Parties. Perusal of the loan agreement Ex.R2 shows that the complainant Harjit Singh and his brother Iqbal Singh had availed the loan from the Opposite Parties in joint name and also pledged the original sale deed alongwith blank signed cheques and other relevant documents. The only contention of the Opposite Parties is that the complainant can take the above said original documents by bringing his brother Iqbal Singh alongwith him for receiving the original documents from the Opposite Parties. But we do not agree with the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties. The complainant has placed on record the duly sworn affidavit (Ex.C5) of his brother Iqbal Singh in which he has specifically deposed that he has no objection if his brother Harjit Singh (complainant) has taken the original sale deed dated 04.10.2011 and seven blank cheque alongwith NOC from HDB Finance Services Limited in his absence and this affidavit has nowhere denied by the Opposite Parties. Not only this, the Opposite Parties in its written statement as well as duly sworn affidavit of Sh.Amrish Sharma, Legal Officer Ex.R1 has specifically mentioned that the Opposite Parties have received the loan amount from the complainant. But the officials of the Opposite Parties are without any cogent reason adamant to produce Iqbal Singh brother of the complainant in their office, but we do not agree with the aforesaid contention of the Opposite Parties in this regard. Hence we are of the view that despite submitting the duly sworn affidavit of Iqbal Singh brother of the complainant on record and despite clearing the loan account by the complainant, the Opposite Parties have failed to return the original sale deed alongwith blank cheque to the complainant and there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the instant complaint is allowed and the Opposite Parties are directed to return the original sale deed and seven blank cheque alongwith NOC and all other original documents to the complainant within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost by District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana and thereafter, the file be consigned to record room after compliance.
9. Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.
This Consumer Complaint was originally filed at District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Now Commission) at Ludhiana and it keep pending over there until Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2022 has transferred the instant Consumer Complaint alongwith Other Complaints to District Consumer Commission, Moga with directions to work on this file onward from 14th March, 2022 and accordingly District Consumer Commission, Moga has decided the present complaint at Camp Court, Ludhiana, as early as possible as it could decide the same
Announced in Open Commission at Camp Court, Ludhiana.
