Dated 08.04.2024

As per Sanjay Kumar, President.

O r d e r

1. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant/Opposite party State Bank of India against ex-parte order dated 30.08.2016 passed by Ld. District Consumer Forum, Patna in Consumer Complaint case no. 346 of 2013 whereby and whereunder appellants have been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- by way of compensation and cost of litigation to the complainant/respondent.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case is that complainant had obtained loan from State Bank of India and as security for repayment of loan had deposited his original copy of registered sale deed in the name of Smt. Rani Devi, W/o- Ranjit Kumar.
3. Loan amount was repaid by complainant and no dues certificate dated 18.10.2012 was issued to complaint. After receiving the no dues certificate complainant demanded his original registered sale deed which he had deposited in the bank as security for the loan. However, inspite of repeated requests original sale deed was not returned to complainant as such complainant filed consumer complaint case in the District Consumer Forum, Patna for return of original sale deed deposited as security at the time of obtaining loan as well as grant of compensation for physical and mental harassment and cost of litigation.
4. Notices were issued to opposite party/State Bank of India and they appeared and filed vakalatnama on 09.09.2013 but thereafter, did not filed any written statement and case proceeded ex-parte against them.
5. The District Consumer Forum after hearing counsel for complainant and considering materials on record held that inspite of complainant repaying the loan amount for which no dues certificate was issued by the Bank the original sale deed deposited by the complainant as security for loan amount was not returned which amounts to gross deficiency in service and directed State Bank of India by order as impugned in the appeal to return the original sale deed to complainant within 2 months and further to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and cost of litigation to the complainant aggrieved by which present appeal has been preferred by State Bank of India.
6. Heard counsel for the appellant. Perused the impugned order as well as materials available on record. Respondent had appeared in person but subsequently left appearing.
7. It is now well settled preposition of law and several judgments have been passed by National Commission to this effect that loss of original sale deed deposited by consumer as security for loan amounts to gross deficiency in service by Bank for which consumer is entitle for adequate compensation.
8. National Commission in case of Allahabad Bank Versus Amar Lal Bansal since reported in 2018 (2) CLT (NC) 96  in Paragraphs-2, 3 & 4 has held as follows:

2. The complaint was resisted by the Bank which admitted the deposit of the Sale Deed of the immoveable property with it and the fact that it had lost the said vital document.

3.      The District Forum, directed the petitioner Bank to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation and also execute the re-conveyance deed of the property. Being aggrieved from the order passed by the District Forum, the petitioner Bank approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. The said appeal having been dismissed, the petitioner Bank is before this Commission by way of this revision petition.

4.      The only grievance of the petitioner Bank before this Commission is that the compensation awarded by the Fora below is on the higher side. I, however, find no merit in the contention. The immoveable property in Delhi is a very valuable asset and no one will purchase an immovable property for its full value unless the original documents of the property are delivered to him by the seller. If someone agrees to buy an immoveable property without receiving all the previous Title Deeds of the property, he will purchase the same at a price much lesser than the price it is fetch if sold along with all previous Title Deeds. Therefore, it can hardly be disputed that there has been  substantial erosion in the current saleable value of the property on account of the petitioner Bank having lost the original Title Deed of the property. The compensation awarded by the District Forum is rather on the lower side and there is absolutely no scope for reducing the same. No other contention is advanced before me. The revision petition being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.

9. National Commission in case of State Bank of India Vs. Vallu Sowjanya (2020) (4) CPJ (NC) 235 in paragraph no. 12 has held as follows:

12.  It is clear that the District Forum had directed to return the original title deeds. However, it is apparent that the bank didn’t have the title deeds in their possession, although the complainant had deposited the same. Hence, they cannot return it. If this order is not modified, this will remain un-executable. The directions are, therefore, modified as under:

1.The Petitioner is directed to issue a certificate, showing that the title deed deposited by the complainant were lost by them. The certificate shall be issued within eight weeks from today.

2.Pay all the compensation as awarded by the Fora below i.e 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand) by the State Commission;

3.It is apparent that now the complainant has to seek a certified copy of the title deed and it is common knowledge that the value of the property decreases when the original deeds are not there. The complainant, therefore, needs to be compensated for the loss of the value of her property. There is no method to calculate the actual loss of the property. The petitioner, therefore, is directed to pay an additional compensation of 1 lakh to the complainant, keeping in view that the total value of the building was above 13 lakh when the loan amount was sanctioned. The entire compensation amount shall be paid within eight weeks to the complainant, failing which the petitioner is liable to pay interest on this amount @9% p.a till the date of actual payment.

10. District Consumer Forum has taken a very lenient view by awarding compensation of Rs. 10,000/- only.
11. Order passed by District Consumer Forum to return original sale deed within 2 months is incapable of performance unless original sale deed is traced. Bank has already issued a certificate dated 21.06.2023 stating therein “we have provided certified copy of the aforesaid title deed to the title holder Smt. Rani Devi, W/o- Sri Ranjit Kumar till date original tittle deed is traced, certified copy of the Title Deed issued by the competent authority be treated as substituted copy of original deed”.
12.  It is least expected from the bank to hold an enquiry fix responsibility for the loss of original sale deed and take appropriate action against the employees found responsible for the loss of original sale deed with liberty to realise the compensation amount paid to complainant.
13.  Appeal is devoid of any merit and is accordingly, dismissed with enhancement of compensation amount to Rs. 50,000/- to be paid to the complainant within 60 days from the date of receipt of order passed by this Commission failing which interest @9% p.a shall become payable.
14.  A copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the District Commission, Patna by E-mail forthwith and order to be uploaded on the website of the Commission.
15.    Let the file be consigned in the record room along with copy of this order.

 ( Md. Shamim Akhtar)                                                                                             (Sanjay Kumar,J)

       Member                                                                                                                    President

Md. Fariduzzama