BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 283 of 2016
Date of Institution : 24.10.2016
Date of Decision : 5.9.2017.
Jagdish alias Jagdish Chander, aged 50 years, son of Ram Chander son of Mohna, resident of village Chaharwala, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
ICICI Bank Ltd., Main Branch, Dabwali Road, Sirsa, Tehsil and District Sirsa through its Branch Manager.
...…Opposite party.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH. R.L.AHUJA…………………………PRESIDENT
SMT. RAJNI GOYAT ………………… MEMBER
SH. MOHINDER PAUL RATHEE …… MEMBER.
Present: Sh. M.K. Singla, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. JBL Garg, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
The case of the complainant in brief is that complainant and his brother Jagat Singh @ Jagat Pal had availed credit facilities from the op- bank for agricultural purposes against mortgage of their agricultural land i.e. 1/3rd share of land measuring 239 Kanal 10 Marlas situated within the revenue estate of village Chaharwala, Tehsil and District Sirsa. A rapat no.494 dated 28.5.2013 was incorporated in the revenue record in respect of the mortgage of the said agricultural land of the complainant and his aforesaid brother. That on 15.1.2015, complainant entered into an agreement to sell his 8 kanal land out of the land mortgaged in favour of op bank with one Vinod Kumar son of Ran Singh, resident of village Chaharwala and received a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as earnest money. The date for execution and registration of sale deed was fixed as 15.5.2015. The complainant undertook the responsibility to arrange the No objection certificate from opposite party after clearing the total loan amount/ mortgage money. It is further averred that the complainant and his aforesaid brother continued making repayment of the above loan to the bank and on 6.5.2015 they made the full and final repayment of the said loan by making payment of Rs.5,80,000/- and Rs.1,72,200/- and thereby cleared their said loan account. On 6.5.2015 itself, brother of complainant filed an application for issuance of no due certificate and also told the official of the op about the agreement for sale and date fixed for execution and registration of sale deed. The official of the op assured the brother of complainant for issuing of NOC before the date of execution of sale deed i.e. 15.5.2015 but did not issue the NOC to the complainant. The complainant made repeated requests to the officials of op but they did not issue the NOC to the complainant. It is further averred that complainant could not execute the sale deed on 15.5.2015 and felt very humiliated and insulted. The complainant requested to the purchaser for extension of time for execution and registration of sale deed and same was extended on 14.5.2015 up to 25.6.2015. Thereafter, the complainant met the op on 5.6.2015 and the official of op told the complainant that the earlier application for issuance of NOC has been lost and the complainant should move afresh application. This was highly shocking to the complainant. The complainant having no other alternative moved another application for issuance of NOC. Besides this, the complainant issued a legal notice dated 6.6.2015 to the op for issuance of NOC within a week and also to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing unnecessary harassment etc. but the op did not pay any heed and did not issue NOC up to 25.6.2015. The complainant again requested the purchaser of land for extension of time for execution and registration of sale deed and accordingly same was extended up to 31.8.2015. Thus, the complainant was deprived from getting the remaining sale consideration i.e. Rs.9,00,000/-. The complainant had to pay this amount to his creditor to whom he had promised to pay the amount on 15.5.2015. The NOC was issued by the op in July, 2015 and the complainant could execute the sale deed on 29.7.2015 and got his balance sale consideration of Rs.9,00,000/- on 29.7.2015. That in this manner, the op by its act and conduct has been indulged in unfair trade practice and committed gross deficiency in service towards the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite party appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that Bank has issued NOC as and when the complainant completed all the formalities for issuing of NOC. As the customer has not completed formalities of NOC and same was pending at his end, hence question of harassment etc. does not arise. Remaining contents of the complaint have also been denied.
3. The complainant produced his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C13. On the other hand, op produced affidavit Ex.R1.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.
5. The perusal of evidence of complainant reveal that complainant has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A in which he has deposed that repayment of loan taken by him and his brother was made on 6.5.2015 as full and final payment by making payment of Rs.5,80,000/- and Rs.1,72,200/- and cleared the loan account. He has further deposed that he made requests to the bank for issuance of the NOC, but, however, the officials of the bank had been avoiding to issue the NOC. He has also deposed that he had entered into a sale agreement for the sale of land and due to non issuance of NOC well in time, they had to suffer a lot and ultimately the NOC was issued on 20.7.2015, which caused great hardship and loss to the complainant. The perusal of copies of deposit receipts show that last payment was made on 6.5.2015 and it was the obligation of the officials of the bank to issue the NOC to the complainant without any delay. The legal notice Ex.C5 also reveal that same was issued on 6.6.2015 to the Branch Manager of the op bank to issue the NOC within a period of one week, but, however, op bank did not issue NOC well in time due to reason best known to the officials of the bank. From the conduct of officials of the bank it appears that they were deficient in their services by not issuing the NOC well in time. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for op has pointed out that NOC was issued on 20.7.2015 vide Ex.C13 but, however, it is proved fact on record that this NOC was issued after two and half months of the date of deposit of full and final payment of the loan amount which clearly amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.
6. In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as composite compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant will be entitled to interest @9% per annum on the above said amount from the date of filing of present complaint till actual payment. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:5.9.2017. Member Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
