CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – X
GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI
Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel)
New Delhi – 110016
Case No.89/2019
PANKAJ CHAUDHARY,
PLOT NO. 207, SECTOR 4R,
FARIDABAD,
HARYANA COMPLAINANT
Vs.
- RELIANCE HOME FINANCE LIMITED
THROUGH MANAGER
BRANCH OFFICE AT :
260/261, DEV HOUSE, TRIBHUVAN COMPLEX
ISHWAR NAGAR, NEW FRIENDS COLONY (WEST)
NEW DELHI – 110065
ALSO AT:
RELIANCE HOME FINANCE LIMITED
THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR
REGISTERED OFFICE AT:
RELIANCE CENTRE, SOUTH WING,
SANTACRUZ (EAST), MUMBAI-400055.…..RESPONDENT/ OP
Date of Institution-06/05/2019
Date of Order- 01/07/2022
O R D E R
RASHMI BANSAL– Member
The present complaint filed by complainant against OP claiming compensation for deficiency in services for misplacing / losing his property documents
deposited at the time of sanctioning of loan from OP despite paying entire loan amount, along with litigation cost and seeking assistance of OP in preparing new documents.
Complainant submits that he has secured a loan of Rs.95,50,000/- @ 11.6% interest from the OP on 30.06.2017. Ex.-C1 and deposited following documents of his property with OP;
- PTM (Permission to Mortgage) from HUDA in favor of OP, Ex. C2;
- Original conveys deed dated 25.04.1985 executed by HUDA in favor of father of complainant, as Doc. No. 299 of the above said property, Ex. C3;
- Original Transfer letter dated 31.12.2007 issued by HUDA in favour of mother of complainant in respect of the said property, Ex. C4;
- Original Occupation Certificate Dated 16.05.1998 issued by HUDA in favour of father of complainant in respect of above said property, Ex. C5;
- Transfer Deed in favour of complainant, Ex. C6;
It is submitted by complainant that during the pendency of the loan account with OP, the complainant got offer from ICICI bank, offering loan at much lower interest rate, therefore, he decided to switch the loan account to ICICI bank from the OP and accordingly paid the entire loan amount to OP. ICICI Bank, tendered a loan account to the complainant with a rider that the complainant would obtain the original documents from OP and submit the same to the ICICI bank, Ex. C7.
This is further submitted by the complainant that since November, 2018, he had been requesting the OP to return the above stated document, however, OP failed to provide them and kept on delaying on one pretext or another. OP issued a NOC, vide its letter dated 17.01.2019, Ex. C8, to the complainant, certify the repayment of total loan and returned two documents, being PTM – permission to mortgage from HUDA and transfer deed executed in favour of complainant, but remaining documents were not returned by OP, therefore, complainant sent a legal notice dated 24.01.20192, Ex. C9, to OP, which was replied to by OP vide its letter dated 29.01.2019, Ex. C10, stating that the officials at the Chennai Branch of OP are searching for the said documents. Later, vide its letter dated 18.03.2019, Ex. C11, OP admitted to complainant that the documents submitted by him has been lost/ misplaced and a police complaint dated 14.03.2019, Ex. C12, and a FIR dated 14.03.2019 was lodged for the said documents.
Aggrieved by the conduct of OP, complainant has filed the present consumer complainant, and notice for appearance were issued to OP vide order dated 13.05.2019 but OP failed to appear, despite service and, as such, was proceeded ex - parte vide order dated 20.09.2019.
Complainant filed his ex-parte evidence. During the pendency of the proceedings, the complainant received a letter dated 18.09.2019, Annexure 14, from OP, stating that they have found the lost/ misplaced documents and asked complainant to collect the same.
The complainant submits that though he has received the original documents on the same day but by that time he had already gone through the severe mental tension, harassment and mental agony as he encountered hardship and huge financial loss in getting the duplicate copies of the lost documents and also his loan account with ICICI was jeopardized due to non - submission of the original documents which also caused him serious financial loss. Complainant submits that for the negligent act of OP, he is entitled for compensation to of Rs. 50,000/- for mental harassment coupled with financial loss towards expenses of obtaining duplicate documents and a compensation of Rs.10 lakh towards mental agony and harassment due to deficiency in services on the part of OP by being failure in not returning the original property documents of the complainant back to him by OP in time. The complainant states that being big organization, OP is under duty to keep the said documents safe and secure but due to negligence has misplaced the important documents and therefore, deficient in providing service to complainant and by doing so OP had caused grave damage to complainant.
Complainant has relied upon the order of the Hon'ble NCDRC in Secretary manager Mayanand Regional Co-operative Bank vs. Ebrahimkutty, FA 228/2014, wherein vide order dated 20.02.2017, OP was directed to compensate the complainant for the loss of original document by OP under the similar facts and circumstances.
We have heard the complainant and carefully perused the documents placed on record by him.
Since, OP chose not to appear and to defend the case and as such proceeded ex – parte, therefore, all the averments made in the complaint are deemed to have been admitted by the OP and the evidence led by the complainant stands unrebutted. Moreover, in view of the admitted position of OP, this is established that OP is deficient in service for not ensuring safety and security of the documents given to him, which act amounts to ‘faulty’ and ‘imperfect’ performance of service, duly covered in the definition of ‘deficiency’ in service under section 2 (1) (g) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
In Jacob Mathew vs. State of Punjab and Ors. (2005)6 SCC 1, Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that “Negligence is a breach of duty caused by omission to do something and Commission or doing something which is prudent and reasonable man would not do”.
Though the complainant has received back his original document, but that does not lessen the extent of trouble, mental tension, harassment and agony as well as the financial loss caused to complainant because of the negligent act of OP during all this period. The mentioned documents are important documents and it was, thus the responsibility of OP for keeping them safe and secure.
In the mentioned deliberation, to meet the ends of justice, it is appropriate to direct OP, who have lost the document due to its carelessness leading to physical, mental and financial difficulties to the complainant and guilty of deficiency in service on its part, to pay compensation of an amount of Rs. 50,000/-to complainant and Rs.10,000/- towards litigation costs. The same should be paid to complainant within 90 days from the date of the order, failing which the entire amount shall carry an interest @9% p.a. till the actual realisation of the amount.
The file be consigned to record room after providing copy of the order to parties free of cost.
The consumer complainant could not be decided within statutory period due to heavy pendency of the court cases.
The order be updated on website www.confonet.nic.in
The order contains 4 pages and bears my signature on each page.
