By G. Yadunadhan, President:

            The case of the complainant is that complainant along with his wife Mrs. Raziya Kannoth had approached the opposite party during the 1^st week of April 2006 for availing a housing loan for the purpose of constructing a house under the Grihaprakash scheme of the opposite party.  They jointly applied for the same vide their application No.326859 and produced all the documents required by opposite party.  The opposite party has thereafter issued a title approval note after evaluation of the application and issued sanction letter on 24.4.2006.  After receiving the sanction letter the complainant had complied all the formalities required as per sanction letter.  LIC policy No. 790731680 and 790719806 which stands in the name of complainant and his wife were also assigned to the opposite party as required by them on 4.5.2006.  Even though the complainant complied all the formalities, opposite party refused to pay the loan amount stating that the title deed of the property is a laminated one and the same is not acceptable.  Hence complainant is seeking relief against the opposite party to return the original title deeds and to reassign the policy in their name and also to refund the processing charge along with compensation.

            Opposite party entered in appearance and filed version.   Opposite party admitted the sanction letter.  But they denied the sanctity of the letter.  It is not a final opinion by the opposite party.  Opposite party further admitted that they have received processing charge of Rs.2704/- and further denied the averments of the complainant that he has purchased cement bags worth Rs.10550/-, sand for Rs.12500/- and steel for Rs.10000/- and these are purchased on the strength of sanction letter issued by the opposite party.  Under these circumstances complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for and hence complaint is liable to be dismissed.

Points for consideration.  Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief?  If so, what is the relief?

Complainant was examined as PW1 and Ext. A1 to A8 were marked on the side of the complainant.

Opposite party has no oral or documentary evidence.

            Ext. A2 document is an approved letter, which shows the loan has been approved.  Ext. A3 letter is the sanction letter dated 12.4.2006 and Ext. A5 is the policy assigned in favour of the opposite party in connection with loan.   After completing all the formalities opoposite party refused to grant loan to the complainant.  After repeated demands complainant sent a lawyer notice dated 24.8.2006, which is marked as Ext. A7.  Opposite party replied to the same on 13.10.2006 stating that title deed No.1211/05 submitted is a laminated document.  Laminated documents are not acceptable.  This intimation is in a highly belated stage.  It is a clear deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  On reverse side of Ext. A3, caluse (4) mentioned that the property in connection with which this loan has in principle, been sanctioned, must conform to the legal and technical standards and requirements of LIC Housing Finance Ltd.  This should be convinced to the applicant by writing in capital letters.  This also shows an unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.  Delay in granting not explained by the opposite party before sending the lawyer notice on 3.10.2006.  Under these circumstance complainant is entitled to get relief from the opposite party.

            Therefore we are of the opinion that opposite party is directed to return the original title deed and also directed to reassign the policy in favour of the complainant and his wife and also to refund the processing charge of Rs.3,000/- along with compensation of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.   No cost is ordered separately.  Comply the order within one month.

            Pronounced in open Court this the 4^th day of May 2009.

                                    Sd/-President                                  Sd/-Member

APPENDIX

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1            Receipt dated 21.5.2006 for Rs.1122/-.

A2            Photocopy of letter from the O.P. to complainant.

A3            Photocopy of Sanction letter.

A4            Temporary receipt No.3122 dated 13.5.06 for Rs.1582/-.

A5        Copy of letter dated 22.5.06 from the O.P. to Complainant.

A6        Retail invoice/bill and cash memorandum – 6 Nos.

A7        Copy of lawyer notice dated24.8.06.

A8        Reply to Ext. A7 lawyer notice.

Documents exhibited for the opposite party:

Nil.

Witness examined for the complainant:

PW1            Basheer Ahmed, D/o. Abdulla K.C., Kannoth House, Kozhukkallor.

Witness examined for the opposite party:

None.

-/True copy/-

Sd/-President

(Forwaded/By Order)

Senior Superintendent.