Non delivery of the mortgaged property documents to the loanee herein the complainant by the OP-1 has obliged the complainant to lodge this complaint for redressal u/s 12 of the CP Act 1986.
The quint-essence of the complaint goes that the complainant got a loan from the OP-1 who had taken some property mortgage as security for the loan. The loan has been finally settled by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Siliguri of the said bank and according to the decision of one time settlement the loan has been repaid in full and no dues certificate has been issued by Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Siliguri of the said bank on 15.11.2017. But in spite of repeated request the loanee has not got back the deeds of the mortgage, now the complainant had prayed for releasing all the title deeds and other documents lying against the C/C loan account bearing No. 31381309864 and also for a compensation for harassment and mental agony for an amount of Rs.1 lakh and a litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) only.
The OP-1& 2 in their averment has denied all the allegations of not releasing the documents of deeds and others for some prejudices. They had stated that the CC loan of the customer against the said account number became an NPA and they were obliged to file a suit before the DRT Siliguri vide NO.OA/41/2018 for recovery of the loan amount. After that the complainant had settled the dispute amicably under OTS scheme and made full payment as per terms and conditions of OP. It is also stated that the deeds of mortgaged property stands in the name of Manoj Kumar Dey, Minoti Dey and soma Dey who themselves had personally appeared to the bank to mortgage the property against the said loan and according to the rule the mortgagers themselves have to pray for releasing the mortgaged deeds. They had stated more that the deed of the mortgaged property in the name of Sri Manoj Kumar Dey has been referred as an exhibit against title suit No.4/2017 between Lakshmi Roy vs Manoj Kr Dey in the court of learned civil judge (Junior Section) Dakshin Dinajpur District at Balurghat. The exhibit has been handed over to the bank by the said Ld. Court and still remains in their custody. In the letter bearing No. SARB/11/PL/794 dt. 10.08.2017 Shri Abhijit Roy Advocate of the complainant has been informed “Regarding delivery of security documents, please advise your client to bring all the mortgagors along with their original KYC documents and passport photographs of each mortgagor for collection of the securities mortgaged as per bank’s norms, after withdrawal of DRT suit filed. Regarding delivery of security documents of Sri Manoj Kumar Dey please advise him to bring Consent Decree from Balurghat Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court for the case No.TS-4/2007”. But never the complainant till this date had taken an endeavour to comply with the instructions of the bank as stated in the said letter. So it is the deficiency on the part of the OP not to get released the necessary mortgaged documents by observing the regulations of the Bank.
On arguments the Ld. Lawyer for the complainant claimed that the deeds of mortgage had been made against the loan of the said account no. So the loanee is entitled to get back the mortgaged deeds. He told more that several times he had appeared before the bank of the local branch from where the loan had been sanctioned and the branch at Siliguri but no result. He asserted that the exhibit G in connection with title suit No.4/2017 before the Ld. Civil Judge (Junior Section) Balurghat, Dakshin Dinajpur district should also be handed over to them as such exhibit is to be placed before the Ld. said Civil Judge by Sri. Manoj Kumar Dey and not by the bank. The Bank had to produce the said deed before the said Ld. Civil Judge as it remained mortgaged with the bank and as the loan has not been repaid at the then period of hearing, Sri Manoj Kumar Dey could not produce it without summoning the said branch of the bank. The Ld. Civil Judge had also handed over the mortgaged deed though referred as exhibit G in the said civil suit title to the bank as the loan repayment in full remained pending. Now, as the loan has already been paid and no dues certificate has been issued, the documents should be handed over to the loanee immediately, otherwise it should be treated as a deficiency in service on the part of the said bank and branch. He argued more that deed of mortgage had been made with SBI Balurghat branch and so the deeds of mortgage are to be handed over to the erstwhile loanee from the SBI, Balurghat branch and not from the SARB of the said bank at Siliguri.
The Ld. Lawyer for the OP said that as the loan has been settled as OTS through DRT at Siliguri so all documents from this branch had been transferred and handed over to SBI, SAR branch Siliguri. So the documents of deeds and others are to be taken back from the said branch by observing the instruction as stated in the letter vide No.SARB/11/PL/17/794 dt.10.08.2017.
Points for Discussion:
- Is the complainant a consumer to the OP-1?
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the OP-1&2?
DECISION WITH REASONS
From the above discussion it is confirmed that the complainant is a consumer to the OP bank. It is not clear why the complainant had not gone through the instructions of SAR branch of the said bank as stated in the letter vide No.SARB/11/PL/17/794 dt. 10.08.2017. Though the Ld. Lawyer of the complainant in person stated to this Forum they had visited the branch of the bank at Balurghat and Siliguri several times, but had got no relief to their grievance, but they had failed to produce any documents regarding their persuasion in getting back the deeds and documents. From the above discussion it is revealed that the OP bank has actually no deficiency in service.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
The complainant is instructed to take effort to get back the mortgaged documents against his CC Loan A/c from the bank by observing the instruction at Para 2 & 3 of the letter bearing No.SARB/11/PL/17/794 dt.10.08.2017 within the 15 days from the date of this order. The OP Bank is instructed to hand over the necessary documents from the local branch at Balurghat, if all necessary processes are observed properly according to this order within 45 days from the date of this order.
No compensation and cost is allowed.
The case succeeds partly on contest.
Let a plain copy of this order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost.
