Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

64/2008

S.Sudha - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Bank Ltd and another - Opp.Party(s)

S.Ilamparithi

03 May 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 23.01.2008

                                                                          Date of Order : 03.05.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.64 /2008

DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 03^RD DAY OF MAY 2018

                                 

Mrs. S. Sudha,

W/o. Mr. Srinivasan,

No.1/394, Kalathumedu Street,

Chennai.                                                                  .. Complainant.         

                                           

 

                                           ..Versus..

 

1. Customer – Accounts Manager,

ICICI Bank Ltd.,

First Floor,

Santhome,

Chennai – 600 004.

 

2. ICICI Bank Ltd.,

Rep. by its Area Operation Manager,

Empire Complex,

Second Floor,

S.B. Marg,

Lower Paral,

Mumbai – 400 013.                                             ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant            :  M/s. S. Ilamparithi & another

Counsel for 1^st opposite party   :  M/s. P.L. Narayanan & others

Counsel for 2^nd opposite party  :  Exparte

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking to return the original Sale Deed and Agreement of Sale to the complainant, to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and to pay the cost of the complaint.

1. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant submits that he availed a sum of Rs.2,75,000/- towards housing loan from the 1^st opposite party and it should be repaid in equated monthly installment of Rs.3,639/- for a period of 20 years. Since the complainant was default in payment of EMI, the opposite party officials threatened and tortured the complainant and their family members.  Hence the complainant was constrained to borrow a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- for a higher rate of interest and closed the loan with penal charges on 26.02.2007.   Further the complainant submits that after closure of the loan, the complainant requested the 1^st opposite party to return the original documents submitted at the time of availing the loan.  The 1^st opposite party has not returned the original Sale Deed in favour of the complainant and the original Agreement of Sale between the complainant and the vendor.  Since the 1^st opposite party has failed and neglected to return the original Sale Deed, the complainant was not able to sell the property at a higher rate and had to sell the property at a very low rate.   Hence the complainant issued legal notice dated:27.04.2007 to the opposite parties and till this date they had never come forward to return the complainant’s original documents.  Hence this complaint is filed before this Forum.

 

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the 1^st opposite party is as follows:

The 1^st opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same. The 1^st opposite party submits that the complainant paid the entire loan amount and the 1^st opposite party issued due letter for closure of loan.  The 1^st opposite party also returned all the original documents available with them.  The alleged original Sale Deed in favour of the complainant is not with the opposite party and it is with the Sub - Registrar, Adayar.  The complainant has not co-operated for getting return of the documents from the Sub - Registrar, Adayar.    The 1^st opposite party submits that there was no deficiency in service on their part and the complaint has to be dismissed. 

3.     The 2^nd opposite party refused to accept the notice and was set Exparte.

4.   In order to prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the 1^st opposite party filed and no documents filed and marked on the side of the 1^st opposite party.

5.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get return of the original Sale Deed executed in favour of the complainant and original Agreement of Sale as prayed for?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for the loss of original documents and mental agony with cost as prayed for?

6.      On point:

Both parties filed their respective written arguments.  Perused the records namely complaint, written version, proof affidavits, documents etc.  Admittedly the complainant has availed a loan of Rs.2,75,000/- towards housing loan from the opposite party and it should be repaid in equated monthly installment of Rs.3,639/- for a period of 20 years. Since the complainant was default in payment of EMI, the opposite party officials threatened and tortured the complainant and their family members.  Hence the complainant was constrained to borrow a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- for a higher rate of interest and closed the loan with penal charges on 26.02.2007; but the complainant has not produced any record to prove such borrowal.  Further the complainant contented that after closure of the loan, the complainant requested the opposite party to return the original documents submitted at the time of availing the housing loan.  The 1^st opposite party has not returned the original Sale Deed in favour of the complainant and the original Agreement of Sale between the complainant and the vendor.  Since the opposite party has failed and neglected to return the original Sale Deed, the complainant was not able to sell the property at a higher rate and had to sell the property at a very low rate. The failure to return of the original Sale Deed and original Agreement of Sale by the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Further the contention of the complainant is that complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony but the complainant has not substantiated the claim in such a manner known to law. 

7.     The contention of the 1^st opposite party is that admittedly, the complainant paid the entire loan amount and this opposite party issued due letter for closure of loan.  The 1^st opposite party also returned all the original documents available with the 1^st opposite party; but the opposite party has not produced any record.  The alleged original Sale Deed in favour of the complainant is not with the opposite party it is with the Sub - Registrar, Adayar.  The complainant has not co-operated for getting return of the documents from the Sub - Registrar, Adayar.   But the 1^st opposite party has not produced any document to prove that the documents are with the Sub - Registrar, Adayar.    On the other hand, it is the practice that the housing loan will be paid by way of Demand Draft.   At the time of registration of sale deed, the receipt for such return of sale deed will be taken by the officials of the 1^st opposite party bank.  In this case, the 1^st opposite party has not produced the said receipt also.  The 1^st opposite party is bound to collect the documents from the Sub - Registrar, Adayar and return it to the complainant immediately after completion of loan.  Since the 1^st opposite party has not returned the document of sale, the deficiency in service is proved.  Muchless, the contention of the opposite party that the documents are not available with the opposite party and is with the Sub Registrar are imaginary and are false establishes the unfair trade practice.  Further the contention of the 1^st opposite party is that the compensation claimed is imaginary and exorbitant.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that  the opposite parties shall return the original Sale Deed and Agreement of Sale stands in the name of the complainant within one month and pay a compensation of Rs.25,000/- with cost of Rs.5,000/-.

  In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  The  opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to return­ the original Sale Deed and Agreement of Sale stands in the name of the complainant within one month and to pay a compensation of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 03^rd  day of May 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	10.04.2007	Copy of letter issued by the opposite parties
Ex.A2	20.04.2007	Copy of Letter to the Bank
Ex.A3	27.04.2007	Office copy of notice to the opposite parties
Ex.A4	03.05.2007	Original Acknowledgement card of the 1st opposite party
Ex.A5	03.05.2007	Original of Acknowledgement card of the 1st opposite party

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES SIDE DOCUMENTS:  NIL

 

MEMBER –I                                                                     PRESIDENT