The complainants have filed this case against the OPs and praying for the following order/relief:

1. Direction against the OPs to return back the KVP’s & NSC’s to the complainants and in default to pay the present value of those KVP’s & NSC’s amounting to Rs. 3,66,121.17 (Three lakhs sixty six thousand one hundred twenty one point seventeen) only together with interest @ 18% per annum with effect from 30.06.2016 till realization of the entire amount.
2. Direction against the OPs to pay the complainants a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- (one lac fifty thousand) only for mental pain, agony and continuous harassment.
3. Direction against the OP to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (fifty thousand) only to the complainants towards punitive damages.
4. Direction against the OPs to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- (thirty thousand) only to the complainants as litigation cost.
5. Any other relief/reliefs which the complainants are legally entitled.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT

1. The complainants are peace loving and law abiding citizen of India, due to their financial requirements they took 2(two) H/B Loan(s) from the OP no. 1 Bank being H/B Loan A/c No. 11168952050 for Rs. 6.5 Lacs and H/B Loan A/c no. 11168952061 for Rs. 2 lacs respectively.
2. That, to obtain H/B Loan vide No. 11168952050 for Rs. 6.5 Lacs the complainants deposited the following documents

1. Original Deed,
2. Original Mutation certificate,
3. Original Khatian of land,
4. Original sanctioned Building plan,
5. Original Tax Receipt of land,
6. Luc certificate etc as per requirement of Bank,

3. The complainants had also issued ten cheques being in nos. 085911 to 095919 each of Rs. 4000/-, drawn on
   Central Bank, Bidhan Market Branch and one signed blank cheque vide no. 085920 issued in favour of the OP no. 1 Bank.
4. That, to obtain H/B Loan A/c no. 11168952061 of Rs. 2 lacs was sanctioned by the OP no. 1 in favour of complainants by taking revised Building plan and two term deposit certificate of SBI 9(nine) numbers of KVP certificate and 12 (twelve) numbers of NSC certificate as security. The term deposit are as follows:-

1. No. 01292029747 of SBI, Maturity value of Rs. 11,193.00 on 23.05.2004 @ 7%,
2. 0129202974700 of SBI, maturity value of Rs. 12,076.00 on 23.05.2004 @ 7.25%.

KVP’s to be doubled after  Years.

1. 23CC113572 of Rs. 5000/- w.e.f.- 30.03.2000.
2. 46BB689646 of Rs. 5000/-, w.e.f. 07/04/1998,
3. 73AA198733 to 738 of Rs. 1000/- each (six numbers), w.e.f. 26.12.1998.
4. 92AA133706 of Rs. 1000/- w.e.f. 08.10.2002.

NSC’s to be doubled after 6 years.

1. 29EE304324 ,
2. 29EE303961 each of Rs. 10,000/- w.e.f.-30.03.2000
3. 02BB409369 to 374 each of Rs. 500/-(six numbers) w.e.f- 30.03.2000,
4. 05DD094092 of Rs. 5000/- w.e.f.- 30.03.2000,
5. 10CC027730 of Rs. 1000/- w.e.f.- 30.03.2000,
6. 02BB418640 of Rs. 500/- w.e.f.- 05.03.1998,
7. 02BB406603 of Rs. 500/-.

Total sum of Rs. 22,000/- of nine numbers of KVP’s and Rs. 30,000/- of twelve numbers of NSC’s along with two terms deposit of SBI for second H/B Loan of Rs. 2 lacs.

5. That, for recovering of first loan instruction was given to the OP no. 1 Bank that, they will withdraw Rs. 4000/- per month from bank account of the complainants being in No. SB A/c -01190028342 of SBI, Siliguri Branch and they also to encash Rs. 4000/- per month for which the complainants issued ten cheques drawn on Central Bank, Hakinpara Branch.
6. That, during the said period of Loan the Complainants collected Bank A/c statement and find that the Bank Authority without encashing the cheque and without taking any permission from the complainants the OPs had imposed penalty showing the complainants as defaulter in paying EMI and the OP no. 1 after long interval had encashed three cheques in a day out of ten cheques.
7. That the complainant no. 1 on 28.03.2007 requested the Bank Authorities in writing to re-invest those certificates, KVPs, NSC’s which were deposited at the time of obtaining second loan.
8. That, on 24.09.2010 the complainant no. 1 requested the officials of the OPs for liquidating those two H/B Loan by paying all the outstanding money but they without paying any heed charging EMI with interest on regular basis and on several occasions both the complainants requested the OPs for settlement of the said two H/B Loan but they paid no heed which is nothing but the deficiency in service by the OPs.
9. That, on 09.10.2015 the complainants liquidated their second H/B Loan being is A/c no. 11168952061 by paying all the dues to the OPs.
10. That, on 30.01.2016 the complainant No. 1 sent notice to the authorities of the OP no. 2 for settlement of the first Loan and requested the OP for returning all the original documents and valuable certificates which were given towards security of Loan but the said notice was ignored by the OPs.
11. That, on 10.03.2016 the first H/B Loan being A/c No. 11168952050 was settled by the complainants who paid all the dues and original Deed, Mutation certificate were handed over to them but the deposit certificate are not returned to the complainants.
12. That the complainants on several occasions requested the OPs for returning their valuable deposit certificates but they did not return those valuable certificates and then the complainant No. 1 made RTI on 19.03.2016 to know whereabouts of those certificates from the OP  no. 3 and in reply to that the OP no. 1 by their letter dated 11.04.2016 inform the complainant no. 1 that two term deposit being no. 01292029747 & 11292029700 were encashed pre-matured on 01.11.2002 and on 15.03.2002 at their own whims and without taking any consent of the complainants and 9KVP’s & 12 NSC’s were not available with them.

That the present valuation of KVP’s & NSC’s are of Rs. 3,66,121.17 in total on 30.06.2016.

13.  That, on receiving reply of the RTI on 11.04.2016 the complainant no. 1 went to the OPs and told that he will take legal action against them for such unfair trade practice when the OP no. 2 requested the complainant no. 1 not to take any legal action against him or against the OP no. 1 and also praying time for tracing out those certificates and they will consult with their superior authority about the premature encashment of two term Deposits to compensate the complainants but of no result.
14. That, the complainant no. 1 approached the Sub-Divisional Legal Services Authority, Siliguri on 18.05.2016 for settlement of that matter and the same was registered as pre-litigation case no. 20/2016 which was not settled on 29.06.2016 due to avoidance of the OPs and thus the acts & conducts of the OPs it is clear that all the OPs are very negligent, deficient and adopted illegal and unfair trade practice for which the complainants have suffered immense mental pain & agony.

Notice was issued from this commission. On receipt of notice all the OPs have appears before this Commission through their Ld. Advocate, filed written version. In the written version the OPs have stated that the instant case is not maintainable in its present form & prayer, case is not maintainable for mis-joinder & non-joinder of necessary parties and the complainant can not be treated as Consumer and disputes cannot be treated as consumer disputes as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. They further stated in the written version that, only to harass them the complainants have filed this case on some false allegation and the contents of Para no. 1 to 6 of the complaint are the matter of record and contents of Para no. 7 & 8 are not true. They also stated that, the contents of Para no. 9, 10, 11 & 12 of the complaint are matter of record & Para no. 13 is partly correct but the allegations are false. They further stated that, the terms Deposits no. 01292029747 and 01292029700 were encashed as per provision and guideline of the Bank and the complainants deposited some KVP’s and NSC’s certificate on 24.10.2002 which are kept in the Loan File and the value of the KVP’s was of Rs. 17,000/- and value of NSC’s was of Rs. 30,000/- and there was no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs towards the complainants.

It is further stated by the OPs that, after the final settlement of the Loan the concerned file is closed and sent to the godown of the RACPC(Retail Assets Central Processing Centre) for the safe custody, the KVP’s and NSC’s are in the godown and the same will be handed over to the complainants when the same will be found. By filing the written version the OPs praying for dismissal of this case.

Having Heard the Ld. Advocate of the complainant and the OPs and on perusal of the complaint, written version, documents filed the following points are to be decided by this commission.

POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION

1. Whether the complainants are consumer as per the provision of C.P. Act?
2. Whether the case is maintainable in its present form and prayer under the provision of the C.P. Act?
3. Whether there is any cause of action to file this case by  the complainants?
4. Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the OPs as alleged by the complainants?
5. Are the complainants have been able to prove this case and entitled to get any relief as prayed for?

                                                DECISION WITH REASONS

All the points are taken up together for discussion to avoid unnecessary repetition and for the sake of convenience and brevity of this case.

At the time of argument Ld. Advocate of the complainants submit that, the complainants have been able to prove their case through the evidence of the complainant as well as through the documents filed by them. He also argued that, the complainants have proved that, at the time of taking H/B Loan’s they deposited not only the Original Deed, Original Mutation certificate, Original Khatian of land, Original sanctioned plain of the building, Original Tax receipt but also they gave two original term Deposit certificate of SBI, nine KVP’s , twelve numbers of NSC’s towards security deposit with the OP no. 1 Bank Authority. It is also argument of the complainant that, without taking any prior permission from both the complainants the Bank Authority encashed pre-maturity of those two term deposit certificate on 01.11.2002 which is nothing but the unfair trade practice of the OP bank. He further argued that, the complainants have liquidated their second H/B Loan on 09.10.2015 and first H/B Loan on 10.03.2016 by paying all the dues but the Bank Authoritiesdid not hand over the KVP’s, NSC’s to the complainants though on several occasions they requested the OPs in writing. He also argued that, lastly the OP no. 3 made reply to the RTI of the complainant no. 1 on 11.04.2016 informed that two term deposit were encashed per-matured on 01.11.2002 and 15.03.2002 respectively and 9 KVP’s & 12 NSC’s were not readily available. It is further argument of the complainants that till today the OPs have not returned the deposit assets to the complainants even after full and final settlement of the two H/B Loans which proves the deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. He also argued that, after full and final settlementof H/B Loans it was the duty of the OPs to return each & every security deposits to the complaint by issuing no due certificatebut the OPs have failed to return KVP’s & NSC’s to the complainants. Ld. Advocate of complainants by filing written Notes of Argument submits that, the complainants have been able to prove their case against all the OPs and the complainants are entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

Ld. Advocate of OPs during argument submits that the complainants have filed this case against the OPs on some false allegations and they have not been able to prove this case against the OPs. He also argued that the instant complaint case is liable to be dismissed. Further argument of the Ld. Advocate of the OPs is that, the complainants have filed this case on 10.04.2018 and the relation between them was over on 11.03.2016 and that’s why the case is barred by law of limitation and he also submits that, when the complainants have filed this case they were not a customer. He prays for dismissal of this case.

Having heard the Ld. Advocate of both the parties and on perusal of the evidence of the parties, documents filed by the complainants, written notes of argument of the parties it is admitted fact by both the parties that, the complainants took the H/B Loans from the OP no. 1 for the sum of Rs. 6.5 lacks & Rs. 2 lacs respectively being H/B Loan A/c no. 11168952050 & H/B Loan A/c no. 11168952061.

It is also admitted fact that, the complainants deposited original Deed, Original Mutation Certificate, Original Khatian, Original Sanctioned Plan of the Building, Original Tax Receipt of Land along with two term deposits of SBI, nine KVP’s and twelve numbers of NSC’s to the OP no. 1 Bank towards security deposits.

It is also admitted fact that the complainants have been able to liquidate their second H/B Loan A/c no. 11168952061 on 09.10.2015 and also liquidated their first H/B Loan A/c no. 11168952050 on 10.03.2016 by paying all the dues to the OP no. 1 Bank.

It is also admitted fact by the OPno. 3 who in reply to RTI dated 19.03.2016 of the complaint no. 1 admits that, two term deposits of the complainants were encashed pre-maturely on 01.11.2002 & 15.03.2002 at their own whims and without consent of the complainants and 9 KVPs & 12 NSC’s were not available to them.

The OP in their written argument have admits that “it is fact that the KVP’s and NSC’S certificates could not return to the complainants. It is also fact that the complainants were very interested in getting those certificates from the OP no. 1”.

From the admission of the OPs it is proves that, the OPs have failed to perform their duties towards their customers. It was the duty of the OP’s to return each and every security deposits to the complainants after issuing No-Dues Certificate but the OP’s have failed to return those fixed deposits to the complaints which clearly prove the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OP’s towards the complainants.

From the evidence of the complainants and from their documents it is proved that, the complaints have tried their level best to get back their KVP’s and NSC’s certificate from the OP’s after full and final settlement of Loans. But the OP’s have failed to return the same to the complainant’s till today and therefore it is safely presumed that the complainant’s have been able to prove the deficiency in service of the OP’s, as well as their unfair trade practice.

Considering all we are of the view that the OP no. 1 to OP no. 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount to the complainant’s.

Hence, it is therefore,

That the instant Consumer Case being in No. 31/2018 be and the same is allowed on contest, but in part.

The OP no. 1 to 3 are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3,66,121.17 ( three lacs sixty six thousand one hundred twenty one point seventeen) only towards security deposits to the complainants within one month from this day with interest @ 8% per annum.

The OPs are also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (fifty thousand) only to the complainant’s for mental pain, agony and continuous harassment of the complainant’s by the OP’s.

The OP’s are also directed to pay Rs. 30,000/- (thirty thousand) only to the complainant’s as compensation for deficiency in service on the part of the OP’s.

The OP’s are also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) only to the complainants as litigation cost.

The OP’s are further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) only to the Consumer Legal Aid Account of this Commission.

The OP’s are also directed to pay the entire amount within one month from this day along with interest @ 8% per annum to the complainant’s with effect from 30.06.2016 till making payment of the same indefault the complainant’s may take steps as per law.

Let a copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.