The case of complainant in brief is as follows. The complainant applied to the first respondent for getting financial help for construction of house and Rs.28,000/- was allowed. On 30.7.1996 the first respondent had given cheque for Rs.7702/- as the last instalment. For that he has submitted stage certificate from the Puthur Village Office.    After obtaining the last instalment he started to remit the loan instalments monthly by Rs.158/-. Later the complainant approached the first respondent to know the balance amount and it is intimated that Rs.14,497/- as the balance. So he remitted Rs.10,000/- on 19.2.2002 and Rs.4997/- on 26.6.02. Even after the closing of the transaction the title deeds were not returned. So he filed complaint before the District Collector Thrissur, but it was also not considered. Hence this complaint.

 

            2. The averments in the counter is as follows: On 31.12.1996 the 2^nd respondent’s office at Thrissur allowed Rs.28,000/- to the complainant to construct a house as per the Maithri Bhavana Nirmana Scheme. On 10.11.1997 a certificate from Village Officer was submitted and first instalment amount was accepted on 20.12.97. He has also received Rs.10,000/- as the 2^nd instalment by submitting certificate from the Panchayat Member. On 30.7.98 he has accepted the 3^rd instalment by submitting certificate from the Grama Panchayat President. He was started to repay the loan amount from 1997 July onwards. Subsequently he has put an application on 19.2.02 to close the transaction. So the respondents demanded to submit certificate from the Village Officer. The complainant informed that it will take time and so one Engineer inspected the property and it is seen that the mortgaged property is different. There is no certificate from the Village Officer to show the completion of construction. It is incorrect to say that Rs.14,497/- as the balance. There is Rs.23,210/- to be paid by the complainant till 31.10.2002. He is also liable to pay the interest and penal interest. The complainant is not entitled for cash subsidy and interest subsidy as the construction is not completed. He is liable to return an amount of Rs.28,000/- with 13½% interest. Hence dismiss the complaint.

 

            3. The points for consideration are:

 

(1)    Is there any deficiency in service on the part of respondents/

(2)    If so, reliefs and costs.

 

            4. The evidence consists of Exts. P1 series to P5 and Exts. R1 to R4 series and R5.

 

            5. All the points can be considered together.

 

            6. The complaint is filed for getting back the title deeds from the respondents which the complainant given as security to the amount taken from the respondents as per Maithri Bhavana Nirmana Scheme. According to the complainant, he has paid entire amount and given a letter to the respondents seeking how much amount he had to pay for closing the loan. At that time the complainant was asked to pay Rs.14,497/-. He paid that amount. So he is entitled to get back the document entrusted with the respondents. But it was not returned. So this complaint has filed. In the counter the respondents stated that the complainant did not complete the entire work and not entitled for the amount and subsidies. They also stated that the mortgaged property is different from the property in which house was constructed. Ext. R4 is the file relating to the Mathri Housing Loan Scheme of the complainant kept by the 2^nd respondent. As per Ext. R4 it can be seen that the amount is to be released by three instalments by producing stage certificate. It can be seen from Ext. R4 that one stage certificate was issued by Village Officer, Puthur stating the completion of foundation work. There is a stage certificate by Puthur Grama Panchayat Member to show the construction of house till the roof. The President, Puthur Grama Panchayat issued a stage certificate on the recommendation of the Grama Panchayat Member to show that the complainant completed the work of roof and the finishing work started. On the basis of these certificates the instalment amounts are provided to the complainant. In the conditions of Maithri Bhavana Nirmana Scheme it was stated that the 3^rd instalment will be given after the entire work. Here as per the certificate of Grama Panchayat President, the last instalment was given. So the case of respondents that the work was not completed is not sustainable. 

 

            7. According to the complainant, he has remitted entire instalments and closed the loan transaction. He further states that on 18.2.02 he had put an application to the Board asking how much amount he had to pay for closing the loan. In the counter respondents stated that no such application was received by them. The complainant states that as per their reply to that application he paid Rs.10,000/- on 19.2.02 and Rs.4997/- on 26.2.02. So the view of complainant is true and believed. The account statement produced by the respondents and marked as Ext. R4 series shows that the statement was taken after payment of Rs.4997/- on 26.2.02. The averment of the complainant that he has completed the loan transaction by paying Rs.14,497/- is seen true. The respondents further stated that completion certificate from the Village Officer is highly necessary for return of documents. Here the last instalment was given as per the certificate issued by the Grama Panchayat President. In that certificate it is stated that finishing works are started and there is no whisper that entire work had completed. So it is not the fault of the complainant and only the fault on the part of respondents in giving the amount for incompleted work if any. According to the respondents as per Ext. R3, they abstained from releasing the title deeds. Ext. R3 is the inspection report submitted by the Engineer. The report shows that the house under Maithri Bhavana Nirmana Scheme was not constructed as per the scheme and also the mortgaged property is different. The person who has inspected the property and issued the certificate is not examined to prove this document beyond doubt because at the time of marking it, the genuineness of this document was objected by the complainant. Only upon this document the respondents abstained from return of documents. So they have to establish their case beyond doubt. The entire amount was released only on stage certificate issued by different authorities as already stated. Here as per records the entire amount was paid by the complainant after deducting the subsidy. If he has violated the terms and constructed the house in another property the respondents can very well initiate criminal action against him. But they did not do so. So they have no right to withhold the title deeds. Ext. R1 is the loan application and contains the terms and conditions of the scheme. As per the scheme the complainant can construct the building according to lay of his land. As per Ext. R1 there are strict directions to comply by the beneficiaries. So it was the duty of the respondents to check the stages of the work directly. This was not done. There is nothing to blame the complainant. If there was a construction as reported by the Engineer, the respondents have to take action against the complainant after issuing notice to him. The issuance of no such notice is seen.  

 

            8. Ext. R5 is the copy of computer statement of accounts produced by the respondents to show the balance amount as alleged by them. The document was prepared as on 30.4.03. Another computer statement is produced by the respondents and marked as Ext. R4 series was dated 14.3.02 does not speak anything about the balance. Ext. R5 states that there were dues from 10.3.02. So, if there was any amount due they have to disclose it at the time of issuance of calculation statement dated 14.3.02. They prepared Ext. R5 after the filing of this complaint. So the genuineness of Ext. R5 is suspicious and we are not accepting. Till date no coercive action is seen taken against the complainant. The respondents willfully without any reason withhold the documents. So they are liable to pay heavy compensation to the complainant.

            9. In the result, complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to deliver the title deeds and other connected documents to the complainant and also directed to pay Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) as compensation and Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as costs to the litigation within one month.