Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/14/867

Gurdev Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Pb&Sind Bank - Opp.Party(s)

S.S.Heer Adv.

23 Feb 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.

                                                C.C.No.867 of 17.12.2014

                                                          Date of decision:24.02.2015 

Gurdev Singh s/o Sh.Munsha Singh @Munshi Singh aged about 65 years r/o House No.4, village Basraon, P.O.Bhaini Dalera, Tehsil Raikot, District Ludhiana.

                                                          ….Complainant.

                                       Versus       

 

Punjab & Sind Bank, village Pakhowal, District Ludhiana through its Branch Manager.

                                                …Opposite party

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Quorum:    Sh. R.L.Ahuja, President.

                   Sh.Sat Paul Garg, Member.

                   Ms.Babita, Member.

                  

Present:       Sh.S.S.Heer, Adv. for complainant.

Op ex-parte.

                                                ORDER

R.L.AHUJA, PRESIDENT.  

 

1.                Present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by Sh.Gurdev Singh(hereinafter in short to be described as ‘Complainant’) against Punjab & Sind Bank, village Pakhowal, District Ludhiana through its Branch Manager (hereinafter in short to be described ‘Op’), directing them to return the mortgaged documents and also to issue ‘No Due Certificate’ to the complainant besides to pay Rs.1 lakh as compensation and other benefits to the complainant.

2.                In brief, the case of the complainant is that complainant is maintaining his C.C.Account No.8119 old 005216000109016 with the OP and had availed a loan of Rs.50,000/- on 19.12.2002 and on 24.6.2011,  other Rs.1,50,000/- had been taken, thus a total Rs.2 lakh has been availed by the complainant by mortgaging his land out of Khewat No.8/8 measuring 4 Bigha, 4 Biswa, 17 Biswansi having ¼ share, Khewat No.11/11, measuring 10.5-17 and Khewat No.229/259 having Khasra No.573 measuring 1-13-16 having 99/676 share measuring 04-19 total area 1.12.0. The complainant has been regularly depositing the amount in his saving account No.25021 having maintained with OP and OP had transferred the amount of loan installment from his saving account and lastly, the complainant had deposited Rs.2 lakh on 23.11.2013 and the said amount had been transferred to the loan account of the complainant by the OP. After that, the complainant requested the OP that he wants to clear the entire loan account and they informed him that a total amount of Rs.2,08,630/- is outstanding against the complainant. As per their information, the complainant deposited the sum of Rs.2,08,630/- with the OP vide receipt dated 26.11.2014 and cleared the total outstanding amount of the CC/Mortgaged account. The OP has no right to withhold the mortgaged documents when the complainant deposited/cleared the entire amount of loan/liabilities. The complainant had cleared the entire loan of the OP and nothing is due against him. Despite repeated requests made to the OP to issue ‘No Due Certificate’ and to return the documents, OP failed to do so. Hence, this complaint.

3.                Notice of the complaint was sent to OP through registered on 08.01.2015 but the same was not received back and as such, after expiry of 30 days of period, Op was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dt.09.02.2015 of this Forum.  

4.                   In order to prove the case of the complainant, learned counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Ex.CA alongwith documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C3 and closed the ex-parte evidence of the complainant.

5.                We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the complainant.

6.                Learned counsel for the complainant has contended that it is proved on record that the complainant had already paid the entire loan amount to the OP and nothing is due against the complainant. However, despite that, OP failed to return the documents of mortgaged property and also failed to issue ‘No Due Certificate’ to the complainant. Further, learned counsel for the complainant has relied upon judgments titled as Housing Development Finance Corp.Ltd. vs.S.Manjit Singh-2010(3)CPC-394(N.C.); Tata Finance Limited vs. Rajinder Singh and another-2010(2)CPC-362(Punjab State Commission) and Jogindra Devi(Ms.) vs. Himachal Pradesh University and another-2010(2)CPC-364(H.P.State Commission).

7.                We have considered the rival contention of learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the judgments placed on record and have also very carefully perused the evidence on the file.

8.                Perusal of the record reveals that the complainant has relied upon copy of payment receipt Ex.C3 regarding deposit of Rs.2,08,630/- with the OP bank. However, this receipt does not find mentioned that the complainant has deposited the entire outstanding balance towards the loan availed by him from the OP. However, if this amount has been deposited by the complainant in order to clear the balance outstanding and nothing is due against the complainant then in that eventuality, the complainant is certainly entitled to get ‘No Due Certificate’ from the OP bank and also to get the mortgaged documents from the OP bank qua his land, which are lying in the custody of the OP and by not doing so, the OP is proved to be deficient in rendering proper services to the complainant.  

9.                Since, the OP did not appear and contest the present complaint, so evidence adduced by the complainant goes unchallenged and unrebutted.

10.               In view of the above discussion, by allowing this complaint, we direct OP to issue ‘No Due Certificate’ in favour of the complainant and to handover the mortgaged documents qua his land and redeem    the land of the complainant, if the complainant has deposited the entire balance outstanding in the loan account and nothing is due against the complainant and in case, if any outstanding is payable by the complainant, in that eventuality, OP is directed to overhaul the account of the complainant in the presence of complainant after serving him 7 days prior notice and settle the balance outstanding, if any and issue ‘No Due Certificate’ and handover the mortgaged documents to the complainant after receiving the settled amount. If it is found that nothing is due against the complainant, then OP is liable to pay Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand only) as compensation to the complainant on account of mental pain, agony and harassment suffered by him and Rs.2000/-(Two thousand only) as litigation costs to the complainant. Order be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter, file be consigned to the record room.

 

 (Babita)                 (Sat Paul Garg        )                     (R.L.Ahuja)

 Member                     Member                                        President 

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated:24.02.2015

Gurpreet Sharma