DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016

Case No. 325/2012

Shri Murali Subramanian,

G-80, B-1, First Floor,

Dilshad Colony,

Delhi-110095.                                                                 ….Complainant

Versus

ICICI Bank Limited

S-26,27,28 Green Park Extension,

Near Uphar Cinema

New Delhi-110016.                                                     ….Opposite Party

                                                  Date of Institution      :         25.06.12          Date of Order              :         09.01.19

Coram:

Sh. R.S. Bagri, President

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

ORDER

Member - Kiran Kaushal

Brief facts as pleaded in the complaint are that:-

1. The complainant, Murali Subramanian took a housing loan from ICICI Bank (OP). The bank sanctioned a loan of Rs.6,94,960/- on the security of the original documents of property situated at G-80, B-1, First Floor, Dilshad Colony, Delhi-110095. Complainant was regularly paying the installments and in the month of December, 2005 complainant asked for Xerox copies of the documents / original sale deed of the house property for the purpose of getting the electricity and water connection installed. After repeated requests on part of the complainant, officials of OP responded that the original Title Deed of the house were deposited in Mumbai Head Office. Therefore, it was not possible to get the copy of original documents. The complainant still insisted on getting the original documents and to his utter shock, he received a letter issued on 19.05.2009 by OP that the original Title Deed of the property has been misplaced. Anguished at the negligent and careless behaviour of OP complainant wrote various mails during the year 2010 and 2011. In response to the mails sent by the complainant OP suggested him to take the certified true copies of the original title deed of the property but the same was not acceptable to the complainant as he thought that it will directly hit the market value of the property negatively.
2. The complainant to avoid further confusions prepaid the loan and in this context, he made a payment of Rs.1,17,854/- including the pre payment charges of Rs.6,864.92p. as he wanted to settle the issue as early as possible.
3. Aggrieved by the negligent irresponsible and careless behaviour of the OP, the complainant approached the forum with following prayer:-

1. Compensation of loss of original documents by the bank and reduced worth of property Rs.17 lacs
2. Compensation for loss of time, mental agony, harassment suffered by the complainant @ Rs.2 lacs
3. Compensation for notice and legal charges @ Rs.90,000/-.

2. OP resisted the complaint inter-alia on the grounds that despite taking adequate measures by OP the original title deed deposited by the complainant which was kept in one of the storage centers in Mumbai of the OP got misplaced. The OP further admitted that despite all the endeavors OP could not trace the same, therefore, OP arranged the true certified copy of the title deed from the office of Sub-registrar. Further to safeguard the interest of the complainant as soon as the said fact came to the knowledge of OP, it got an FIR registered with regard to the loss of the documents and also got a public notice issued in the local news paper at its own cost.
   1. OP submits that the complainant approached the banking Ombudsman praying for compensation for the loss of title deeds. The banking Ombudsman after hearing both the parties herein awarded a compensation of Rs.25,000/- in favour of the complainant and against OP. It is next submitted that the OP was and is still willing to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation in compliance to the order passed by Banking Ombudsman which was refused by the complainant without any reasonable justification.

3. Rejoinder and evidence by way affidavit is filed by the complainant wherein the averments made in the complaint are reiterated. Evidence of Shri Sanjay Sharma, Manager Legal, ICICI Bank has been filed on behalf OP.
4. Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.
5. After hearing the arguments of the ld. counsel of parties and perusing the material available on record, the Forum is of the opinion:-

Admittedly, the complainant availed the loan of Rs.6,94,960/- from ICICI Bank which was finally paid by 11.11.2011. Before the loan was paid the complainant asked OP to provide him with Xerox copy of the original documents/ title deed to get the water and electricity connection installed. But OP informed him vide letter dated 21.02.2012 that the original document in question deposited against the loan availed had been misplaced from the safe custody of the OP. The OP further informed the complainant that they will provide the certified true copy of the documents. Mails written by OP to the complainant regarding the loss and recreation of the documents are annexed as Annexure-2 and Annexure-5. For the sake of convenience relevant portion of the mails are reproduced as under:-

Annexure-2

“Kindly refer to our loan agreement No. LBDEL00001069025 executed between us, under which we have extended a housing loan of Rs.6,94,960/- (Six Lakh Ninety Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty only) to you. We have to inform you that the Title deed in the favor of Mural Subramanan lyer seems to have been misplaced. However, please be assured that we shall try to trace them on a best effort basis.

Meanwhile as a comfort level to you, we will initiate the following steps at our cost for obtaining certified true copy of the document.

1. Filing/ lodging of NCR Non Cognizable Report about the loss of document
2. Issuing a public notice in the local newspaper
3. Obtaining the certified true copy of the aforesaid document from the office of the sub registrar.”

Annexure-5

“We would like to inform you that the title documents with respect to the property bearing (Plot No. G-80, Flat No.-B/1, First Floor (Black Side), Block-G, Dilshad Colony, Ext.-1, Delhi) are not traceable at our end despite taking adequate custodial and storage precautions. Hence we had initiated the following steps at our cost for obtaining certified duplicate copies of the documents.

Additionally the following steps has been taken:

1. Filled/ lodged of First Information Report about the loss of documents.
2. Issued a public notice in a local newspaper.
3. Obtained certified duplicate copies of the aforesaid documents from the office of the sub-registrar.

We would also like to inform you that the recreation has been done at Bank’s cost and no charges shall be levied to you. We further assure you that re-created documents will have the same legal validity. Further we understand that our official had contacted you and had requested to collect the documents from our Uphaar Cinema branch.”

6. From the mail above the bonafide intention of OP is evident as having lost the original title deed, OP has taken the needful steps to recreate the certified true copy of the lost document.
7. The complainant refused to take the certified true copy of the original documents stating that alienation of the property by virtue of duplicate documents will badly affect the actual market value of the property. Therefore, original document of the property were more acceptable to him. The complainant was further awarded compensation of Rs.25,000/- by banking Ombudsman but the complainant refused to take the same stating that it was not sufficient amount as his loss of very huge. The complainant has sought Rs. 17,00,000/- by way of compensation for loss of original documents by the bank and reduced worth of property and has relied upon the articles based on some judgments. A study of above said articles does not reveal the Forum/ Commission by which the same have been purported to be passed. Reliance cannot be based on literary articles or newspaper cuttings.
8. The Forum is of the opinion that the alleged loss in value of property is imaginary and nowhere in the complaint the complainant has pleaded or suggested that he was selling the property or he has not placed any document on record showing that the value of property had depreciated due to loss of original documents. Therefore, bald averments by the complainant have no evidentiary value. However, this Forum is of the opinion that the loss of such important document constitutes negligence on part of OP but having apologized for the inconvenience caused and doing the needful for getting the certified true copies and further offering an amount of Rs.25,000/- as compensation is the best that the OP could do.
9. From the discussions above, we direct the OP to pay Rs.25,000/- by way of compensation for loss of documents which has already been awarded by the Ombudsman. Since the money is still lying with OP, complainant is entitled to receive interest @ 7% per annum from the date awarded by Ombudsman till realization.
10. OP is directed to pay the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the OP shall become liable to pay interest @ 12% p.a. on the Rs. 25,000/- from the filing of complaint till realization.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 09.01.19.