BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 12^th DAY OF APRIL 2022

ORDER

SRI.K.S.BILAGI, PRESIDENT

1. The complainant files complaint under Section 35 of C.P.Act, 2019 (herein after referred as an Act) for the following reliefs against the OPs:-

(a) Direct the OPs to issue certified copies of documents of title in respect of plot in question which were misplaced / lost by them.

(b) Direct the OPs to publish an advertisement in two national daily newspapers about the loss/misplaced of title documents of the property of the complainant at its own expenses and notify in the copy itself that the original documents lost/misplaced due to fault of the OPs.  On preparing such documents, direct to hand over certified copies of the document papers to the complainant and to direct to include the records of the complainant already having a file in OP No.1 and also direct to certify in the records that procurement documents are equivalent to the original documents;

(c) Direct the OPs to write to concerned departments about loss/ misplaced of property documents and to reimburse the expenses incurring for obtaining the certified/duplicate copies from them.

(d) Direct the OPs to conduct an internal enquiry to fix responsibility and to book criminal case for their negligence as well as undertaken systematic improvements for furtherance of loonies;

(e) Direct the OPs to make payment of an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service and negligence on its part on account of the loss/misplaced of the original title deeds of complainant.

(f) Direct the OPs to make payment of an amount of Rs.15,000/- towards cost of litigation

(g) Pass such order or direction.

2. The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-

The complainant got sanctioned loan of Rs.25,00,000/- on 25.05.2012 from OP No.1 Housing Finance Ltd., and agreed to repay the same with interest at 14.40 p.a. for a period 20 years.  The complainant was struggling to pay EMI with higher rate of interest. Therefore, he moves another bank with the rate of interest at 6.5% p.a. as on January, 2020 which reduces Rs.3,00,000/- interest.  He applied for list of documents with OP No.1 on March, 2020.  Even though, OP No.1 acknowledged the same, but failed to provide certified copies of the documents.  The OP No.1 at one stage reveals that the documents are with OP No.2.  But, OP Nos.1 and 2 failed to provide the certified copies of the documents.  This act of the OPs amounts to deficiency of service.

3. Despite service of notice, both OPs failed to appear before this Commission and they have been placed exparte. 

4. The complainant files his affidavit evidence and relies on nine documents. Heard the arguments of advocate for complainant and perused the records.

5. The following points arise for our consideration:-

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OPs?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
3. What order?

7. Our answers to the above points are as under:

       Point No.1:  Partly in the affirmative.

      Point No.2:- Partly in the affirmative.

      Point No.3: As per final orders

REASONS

8. Point Nos.1 and 2:  It is proved from the allegations made in the complaint and Ex.P.1 that the complainant has purchased apartment bearing No.A007 Block A in Skylark Zenith under the registered sale deed dated 26.02.2012.  It is also proved from the evidence of the complainant and Ex.P.2 that the complainant got sanctioned loan of Rs.25,00,000/- from OP No.1 on 25.05.2012 and agreed to pay interest at 14.40% p.a. and also agreed to repay the loan amount in 240 monthly installments.  The OP No.1 issued Ex.P.3 letter of March, 2020 admitting that original documents were with them.  By issuing Ex.P.4 letter dated 19.03.2021, the complainant had requested OPs to furnish certified copies of the documents.  There is no evidence to show that OP No.1 handed over these documents to OP No.2 and complainant also handed over these documents to OP No.2.  The complainant has made E-mail correspondence for certified copies of the documents.  But, OP No.1 failed to furnish these documents.  The complainant proves the deficiency of service on the part of OP No.1.  But, failed to prove the deficiency of service on the part of OP No.2.  Therefore, OP No.1 is liable to furnish certified copies of the documents deposited by the complainant with it.
9. It is not a case of the complainant that he has repaid the entire loan amount with interest.  Under such circumstances, the claim of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.15,000/- is exorbitant.  The complainant seeks direction against the OPs to conduct internal enquiry and to fix responsibility and to book criminal case for their negligence. This relief is unwarranted.  The OP No.1 is liable to publish an advertisement in Bangalore Daily Publication Kannada and English Newspaper about loss or misplacement of title documents of the property of the complainant.   The OP No.1 is liable to furnish certified copies of title deeds at its own costs.
10. Point No.3:- Having regard to the discussion made above, the complaint requires to be allowed in part against OP No.1 only.  The complaint requires to be dismissed against OP No.2.  OP No.1 is liable to furnish certified copies of the title documents of the complainant at its own costs, publish about loss or misplacement of title documents of the property of the complainant in English and Kannada Daily newspaper published in Bangalore City and file a complaint with police about loss or misplacement of the documents.  OP No.1 is also liable to pay Rs.10,000/- as a compensation for inconvenience caused to the complainant and to pay Rs.3,000/- as cost of litigation. We proceed to pass the following 

  O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part against OP No.1 only.
2. The complaint is dismissed against OP No.2.
3. The OP No.1 shall furnish the certified copies of the title documents of the complainant at its own costs, publish advertisement about loss or misplacement of title documents of the complainant in one Kannada and one English Newspaper circulated in Bangalore City and lodge a complaint with police about loss or misplacement of the title documents.
4. The OP No.1 is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as a compensation and Rs.3,000/- as cost of litigation to the complainant.
5. The OP No.1 shall comply this direction within 30 days from this date.
6. Furnish the copy of this order to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 12^th April, 2022)

Documents produced by the Complainant which are as follows:-