DATE OF FILING :25.02.2011

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 30th day of May, 2011

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No. 46/2011

Between

Complainant : K.V.Balakrishnan S/o Velayudhan,

Kurmullil House,

Adimali P.O, Chattupara,

Idukki District.

(By Advs: Benny Mathew & P.I.Alikhan)

And

Opposite Party : The Secretary,

Devikulam Taluk Co-operative Agricultural

& Rural Development Bank Ltd. No.I-136,

Adimali P.O,

Idukki District.

(By Adv: Praveen.K.George)

O R D E R

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

The complainant availed a loan of Rs.90,000/- from the opposite party bank in the year 1990. He has repaid an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- as principal and interest in the loan account. But the opposite party again demanded further payment from the complainant. So the complainant filed an application before the Kerala State Farmer's Debt Relief Commission in the year 2007 as application No.88/07/ID and an order was passed by the Commission on 25.07.2008 stating the complainant to pay Rs.56,000/- to the opposite party bank. So the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.56,000/- to the opposite party bank and applied for getting the documents such as original title deed of 56 cents of land owned by the complainant, tax receipt, possession certificate etc. which were pledged by him at the time of availing the loan. But it was denied by the opposite party. So a review petition was filed to the Kerala State Farmer's Debt Relief Commission by the complainant and a review order was passed by the Commission on 22.07.2010 and it was ordered to release the documents to the complainant. Again when the complainant approached the opposite party, they have denied the same and requested further amount for getting the documents. So this petition is filed for getting back the documents pledged by the complainant at the time of availing the loan and also for compensation.

2. In the written version filed by the opposite party, it is stated that the complainant availed two loans from the opposite party bank. The documents regarding the title deed of the property etc. were deposited in the bank. The complainant has not remitted the entire amount to close the loan account. The statement of loan account of the complainant is as follows :
 

Total outstanding amount as on 25.07.2008 : Rs.2,28,138/-

Set off by the Debt Relief Commission : Rs. 22,000/-

Set off by the State Debt Relief Commission : Rs. 56,000/-

Set off offered by the bank : Rs. 13,000/-

Amount paid by the Respondent : Rs. 56,000/-

Balance to be paid : Rs. 81,138/-

The opposite party is ready to return the documents on payment of the above said balance amount. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
 

3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?
 

4. No oral evidence adduced by both parties. Heard both sides. Exts.P1 to P4 marked on the side of the complainant.

5. The POINT :- As per the complainant, he availed a loan of Rs.90,000/- from the opposite party bank and repaid an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- in that loan account. The loan was availed in the year 1990. But the opposite party demanded further amount from the complainant. So he approached the Hon'ble Kerala State Farmer's Debt Relief Commission as per application No.88/07/ID and the Hon'ble Commission has ordered an interim stay of all further proceedings of the opposite party against the complainant, copy of the same is marked as Ext.P1. As per the order of the Commission, the complainant has to pay an amount of Rs.56,000/- to the opposite party bank and the balance amount should be suffered by the Government. So the complainant approached the opposite party bank and paid an amount of Rs.56,000/-. Ext.P2(series) are the receipts issued by the opposite party for payment of the same. The entire debt of the complainant was waived as per the order of the Commission. So the complainant approached the opposite party bank for getting the documents which were pledged at the opposite party bank for availing the loan. But the opposite party denied to issue the same. A letter was also issued by the opposite party stating that a bulk amount should also to be paid to the opposite party by the complainant and the letter stating the same dated 31.03.2010 is marked as Ext.P3. So the complainant again approached before the Hon'ble Kerala State Farmer's Debt Relief Commission, Thiruvananthapuram with a review petition and a review order was passed by the Hon'ble Commission on 22.07.2010, directing the bank to settle the case with Sri.K.V.Balakrishnan, the complainant by releasing his documents without further delay. The review order of the Debt Relief Commission dated 22.07.2010 is marked as Ex.P4. As per the written version of the opposite party, the complainant has to pay an amount of Rs.81,138/- to the opposite party bank, because the total outstanding amount as on 25.07.2008 is Rs.2,28,138/-. The set off amount paid by the Debt Relief Commission was Rs.22,000/- and the set off amount by the State Debt Relief Commission was Rs.56,000/-. The set off amount ordered by the bank is Rs.13,000/- and the amount paid by the respondent is Rs.56,000/-. So if the balance amount Rs.81,138/- is paid to the opposite party bank, they will release the documents to the complainant. On perusing the documents produced by the complainant, it is very clearly stated in the review order of the Hon'ble Kerala State Farmer's Debt Relief Commission, Thiruvananthapuram dated 22.07.2010 that the complainant has been remitted Rs.56,000/- on 30.03.2009 as per the order of the Commission dated 25.07.2008. But the bank is keeping the security property of the complainant, which is illegal and directed the bank to settle the case with the complainant by releasing his documents without further delay. If the bank is not observing the same, the complainant can resort to further legal solutions, so that he gets justice protected. The order of the Hon'ble Commission has not been challenged in any other appellate authority by the opposite party. So that order is existing. We find that it is a gross deficiency from the part of the opposite party to keep the documents with the bank after getting this order. Hence we think it is fit to order the opposite party to return the documents to the complainant.

Hence the petition allowed. The opposite party is directed to return to the complainant, the original title deed of 56 cents of land in the name of the complainant, which is deposited before the opposite party bank for availing the loan and the possession certificate of the property of the complainant. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as cost of this petition within 15 days of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of May, 2011

Sd/-

SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

Sd/-

SMT. BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of Complainant :Nil

On the side of Opposite Party : Nil

Exhibits:

On the side of Complainant:

Ext.P1 - Photocopy of Interim Order dated 25.07.2007 before the Kerala State Farmers' Debt Relief Commission

Ext.P2(series) - Photocopy of Receipts issued by the opposite party for payment of Rs.56,000/-

Ext.P3 - Copy of letter dated 31.03.2010 issued by the opposite party to the complainant

Ext.P4 - Photocopy of Review Order dated 22.07.2010 before the Kerala State Farmers' Debt Relief Commission, Thiruvananthapuram

On the side of Opposite Party :

Nil