This appeal is directed against the final order delivered on 30/11/2018 by the Ld. DCDRF, Uttar Dinajpur in CC no. 47 of 2017. Here the appellant is Branch Manager, Regional Manager and Chairman of Bangiya Gramin Bikas bank and the respondent is One Krishna Pada Tarafdar.  The factual matrix of the case is that the respondent Krishna Pada Tarafdar took house building loan from the appellant no. 1 that is Bangiya Gramin Bikas bank, Hemtabad Branch on 17/12/2013 amounting to rupees 14 lakhs which was recoverable till 2033. The EMI was fixed at rupees 13,977 and the said HBL was sanctioned by keeping property of the respondent in mortgage by procuring the original sale deed and other materials documents as hypothecation.

Subsequently, the respondent tried to transfer the HBI loan account to SBI, Karanjhora Branch and approached the appellant Bank Branch for doing the needful. At the time of transferring of the said loan account, the respondent approached the appellant Bank for hand over him the original deed and other necessary documents which was deposited by him  before the appellant no. 1 at the time of securing the said loan. But the Bank Authority has failed to hand over the said documents in spite of repeated approach on the side of the respondent. Ultimately, the Bank has reported him that at the time of shifting the office of the Bank, the said deed and documents become untraceable due to misplace. The respondent has already deposited rupees 12,000 for double searching of the said documents. In spite of repeated request on the part of the respondent, the bank Authority has failed to supply the documents to him so he approached before the Consumer Affairs Department where in spite of notice, the Bank Authority did not turn up. Thereafter, the  respondent was compelled to come before the Ld. Forum for redressal of his grievances against the bank by filing the instant consumer complaint bearing no. 74 of 2017. The appellant no. 1 to 3 was made parties to the case as Opposite parties and they were asked to contest the consumer complaint case by filing WV. The appellant as Op no. 1 to 3 had contested the case by fling the written version and admitted the fact about the HB loan of complainant/respondent and also admitted the fact that the original deed and other documents which was deposited by the complainant/respondent at the time of taking HBL, has already lost due to misplace. The case was heard at length before the Ld. DCDRF, Uttar Dinajpur and thereafter impugned judgement and final order was passed, directing the OP bank to pay rupees 50,000 for mental pain and agony and rupees 15,000 for litigation cost and also directed the Bank Authority to hand over all the documents including the original title deed to the complainant respondent immediately and also directed the Bank to complete the process of taking over and handover the loan transfer within two months. Being aggrieved with the said order, the appeal follows on the ground that the Ld. Forum has failed to appreciate the exact provision of law and facts and circumstances of the case.

The appeal was admitted after condoning the delay and due notice was delivered upon the respondent who has contested the appeal by appointing Ld. Advocate Santunu Chatterji. The appeal was heard in presence of Ld. Advocate of both sides.

Decisions with reasons

Admitted position is that the respondent has secured a loan of rupees 14lakhs for the purpose of construction of building for residential purpose and the EMI was settled at rupees 13977 and he was making the payment EMI in due time and thereafter he wanted to transfer the loan amount to SBI, Karanjhora Branch as rate of interest of SBI was lower than the rate of interest of appellant bank. At the time of processing the said loan transfer it was found that the original deeds and other documents which was deposited by the complainant/respondent for the purpose of hypothecation of the newly constructed building become lost from the custody of the Bank due to shifting of the Banking place and it is clearly admitted on the part of the appellant Bank in their written version. Ld. Forum has observed that the loan documents which was handed over to the Bank by the respondent. It was the bounded duty on the part of the bank to keep the documents in safe by providing utmost care but here in this case the Bank was not diligent one for keeping documents in safe and ultimately has lost the same which has caused serious harm to the complainant/respondent as after the hypothecation or mortgage of the property released after full payment of loan amount, he cannot secure any loan from any other financial institution and this loss cannot be compensated by replacing the original deed with certified copy. Therefore, the Ld. Forum has directed to make payment or rupees 50,000 for compensation, For mental pain and agony of the complainant/ respondent and rupees 15,000 as litigation cost. During the course of hearing of the appeal, the Ld. Advocate of the appellant submits that the Bank has already lost the original documents including the deed furnished by the complainant/respondent before the bank and Bank is not in a position to return bank the said documents as because the misplace or lost of the said deed and documents was happened due to act of God.

He further submits that the respondent has ample opportunity to procure the certified copies of the said documents from the Authorities From where the said documents was originated or registered. He can procure the certified copy of the sale deed from the Sub-registry office and missing of deed in any way does not decrease the valuation of the immovable property.

He further argued that the compensation of rupees 50,000 and litigation cost of rupees 15,000 is very excessive one as because for the lost of sale deed and other documents, there was no pecuniary loss on the part of the complainant/respondent. So this order should be set aside. Ld. Advocate of the respondent at the time of his turn strenuously cantered against the arguments canvassed before this Commission on the part of the appellant. He submits that once the original papers of loan are lost, the consumer would not be permitted to took further loan from bank on the basis of certified copies. When such papers are lost, banks should take full responsibility, follow due process required to get the same certified copy and also compensate the consumer for the consequential loss. The Bank should also execute  indemnity bond against any loss or damage that the consumer may suffer on account of the non-availability of original title deeds.

He further submits that for obtaining certified copy of the deed, the bank at first to lodge FIR about the loss of the documents and subsequently, it should be published in a newspaper to inform all the public at large and subsequently bank gets a certified copy from the competent authority for the loss documents. He further submits that the bank always keeps the original deeds on the fear that the loaned may become  defaulter in making payment of monthly instalment. So Bank has the responsibility to keep the said documents in safe custody. Here the Bank has taken very lackadaisical attitude and causes harm to the complainant/respondent for misplacing or did not deliver it in due time to the complainant/respondent.

So,  the deficiency of service on the part of the Bank was very much established and the Ld. Forum has rightly passed the impugned order.

He submits that the grounds of appeal devoid of any merit and it should be dismissed in lamine.

After going through the pleadings of both sides and after consulting the valuable arguments canvassed before this Commission from the side of legal representatives, this Commission finds it that the callousness of Bank has clearly established in this case as because the Bank has lost the original deed and documents which is not expected from a state recognized Bank guided by RBI rules. We know very well, the loss of deed dose not devalue the property in General but it causes serious harm to the owner of the property for lost of the valuable deeds and documents in original form. So, the compensation awarded by the Ld. Forum for mental pain and agony appears to be justifiable one. We may consider the quantum of compensation amount. Rupees 50,000/- compensation for loos of documents is very excessive one which should be decreased to some extent and the litigation cost awarded rupees 15,000 also appears to be very high one. The Bank has already lost documents which they have admitted before this Commission, as well as before the Ld. Forum.

So, they are not in a position to hand over the original deeds & documents to the complainant/respondent immediately.

However, bank should be given an opportunity to trace out said documents and make  a GD entry before the concern Police Station for loss of the  said documents, so, that the certified copy of the said documents can be procured in due course. Bank also can execute an indemnity bond against the loss of such documents so that by virtue of the said indemnity bond, the consumer should not be endured from further sufferance. So, the order of Ld. Forum to some extent should be amended for making convenience of the order to be executed.

Hence it is,

Ordered,

That the appeal be and same is  partly allowed on contest without any cost. The order of Ld. Forum to make payment of rupees 50,000 for mental pain and agony to be reduced to rupees 25,000 and the litigation cost awarded in favour of the complainant/respondent to rupees 15,000 should be reduced to rupees 5,000.

The Bank Authority are hereby directed either to trace out the original documents and if the Bank fails to trace out the said missing documents within two months, shall execute an indemnity bond in favour of the complainant/respondent for the loss of such documents.

The Bank should complete the process of loan handover and take over within two months from this date of order of this appeal. The Order of Ld. Forum  for asking the Banks for interest. @ of 5 per cent per annum for its failure to make payment the awarded money shall remain intact.

The interim order of stay is hereby now recalled. The certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost and the same to be supplied to Ld. DCDRF, Uttar Dinajpur by E-mail.