Date of Filing : 06/05/2013

Order No.  32  dt.  16/02/2018

       The case of the complainants in brief is that the complainants took loan from o.p. bank and due to financial crisis the amount could not be paid to o.p. by the complainants. At the time of obtaining loan the complainant deposited the title deed of the house property. Subsequently the complainants filed a case before Ld. DRT II being no.SA/21/2006 u/s 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI  Act. During the pendency of the said case the bank advised the complainants and offered a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- towards the settlement of the entire claim dues in the cash credit account of the complainants standing in the trade name of M/s Boskan. The complainants provided the said amount by a demand draft to o.p. bank which was encashed on 25.3.12 and o.ps. decided that the claim against the complainants as full and final settlement. The complainants at the time of settlement requested the o.ps. for handing the original title deed of the residential flat in the name of Tridip Kumar Bir, but those documents were not  handed over for which the complainants filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps. for returning the said original title deed standing in the name of Tridip Kumar Bir as well as compensation and litigation cost.

            The o.ps. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that in order to make false allegations the complainant filed this case against the o.ps. The complainants by suppression of material fact stated that the documents were withheld by o.ps. but the original documents in respect of the title deed of the complainant no.1 were lying in the custody of Ld. 5^th Court of Civil Judge, (Senior Division) in title suit no.141 of 2006 between the complainants and o.ps. for realization of the arrear due in respect of the loan availed by the complainants. Despite having such knowledge the complainants filed a case against the o.ps. before DRT III and the complainants have not withdrawn the said case. The o.ps. have already withdrawn the documents from Ld. 5^th Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Alipore and the same  has been handed over to the complainants. In order to harass the o.ps. the complainants filed this case. The o.ps. have already received the documents on 31.7.13 and asked the complainants to collect the same, but the complainants are reluctant for the same. On the basis of the said fact o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.

            On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:

1. Whether the complainants took loan from o.ps.?
2. Whether the settlement was arrived at between the parties
3. Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.?
4. Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons:

            All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.

            Ld. lawyer for the complainants argued that the complainants took loan from o.p. bank and due to financial crisis the amount could not be paid to o.p. by the complainants. At the time of obtaining loan the complainant deposited the title deed of the house property. Subsequently the complainants filed a case before Ld. DRT II being no.SA/21/2006 u/s 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI  Act. During the pendency of the said case the bank advised the complainants and offered a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- towards the settlement of the entire claim dues in the cash credit account of the complainants standing in the trade name of M/s Boskan. The complainants provided the said amount by a demand draft to o.p. bank which was encashed on 25.3.12 and o.ps. decided that the claim against the complainants as full and final settlement. The complainants at the time of settlement requested the o.ps. for handing the original title deed of the residential flat in the name of Tridip Kumar Bir, but those documents were not  handed over for which the complainants filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps. for returning the said original title deed standing in the name of Tridip Kumar Bir as well as other reliefs.

            Ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that in order to make false allegations the complainant filed this case against the o.ps. The complainants by suppression of material fact stated that the documents were withheld by o.ps. but the original documents in respect of the title deed of the complainant no.1 were lying in the custody of Ld. 5^th Court of Civil Judge, (Senior Division) in title suit no.141 of 2006 between the complainants and o.ps. for realization of the arrear due in respect of the loan availed to the complainants. Despite having such knowledge the complainants filed a case against the o.ps. before DRT III and the complainants have not withdrawn the said case. The o.ps. have already withdrawn the documents from Ld. 5^th Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Alipore and the same  has been handed over to the complainants. In order to harass the o.ps. the complainants filed this case. The o.ps. have already received the documents on 31.7.13 and asked the complainants to collect the same, but the complainants are reluctant for the same. On the basis of the said fact o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.

            Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainants took loan from o.p. bank and during the pendency of the case at different fora the case was compromised and the complainants were asked to pay an amount of Rs.4,50,000/-. At the time of granting loan o.ps. received some documents, title deed of the complainant no.2 and o.ps. in order to realize the amount paid by the bank to the complainants filed a title suit before Ld. 5^th Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Alipore and in the said case those documents were submitted. It is also evident from the materials on record that during the pendency of the said case the complainants filed a case before DRT III. During the pendency of the said case the complainants agreed to pay the settled amount of Rs.4,50,000/-. After receiving the said amount the complainants in order to give a trouble to o.ps. falsely made out a case that he has not been provided with the documents received by the bank at the time of granting loan to the complainants.  The o.ps. in the w/v specifically stated that they withdrew the documents from Ld. 5^th Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Alipore on 31.7.13 and the said fact was informed to the complainants, but the complainants in order to get financial benefit by making out a false allegation against the o.ps. filed this case with the allegations they have not received the documents from o.ps. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case we hold that the case filed by the complainants has got no merit, but a direction is to be given upon the o.ps. for handing over the documents to the complainants within 30 days from the date of communication of this order. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.

            Hence, ordered,

            that the CC No.254/2013 is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. The o.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to hand over the documents including the title deed in question to the complainants along with to pay compensation of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) only for harassment and mental agony within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 8% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.