IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 31st day of March, 2012
Filed on 25-03-2011
Present
1. Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
2. Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
3. Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.107/2011
between
Complainant :- | Opposite party:- |
1.Sri.M.Antony, Chithira ,Panavally Kandam, . Poonthoppu Ward, Alappuzha (Now residing at Kaviyam, Near . Manasameera Auditorium, Ambalapuzha P.O. 2.Praise Antony , D/o .M.Antony residng at -Do- (By Adv. M.G. Reshu,Alappuzha) | The Branch Manager,Vijaya Bank,Chandra Square,Cullen Road, Alappuzha. (Adv. C.Prameswaran,Alappuzha) |
O R D E R
SRI.JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)
The complainants' case in succinct is as follows: - The complainant availed a total loan amount of Rs.300000/-(Rupees three lakhs only ) from the opposite party. For the said purpose the complainants mortgaged the title deed of their property along with allied 14 documents. The complainants had been effecting payments of the material loan regularly without failure. In the meanwhile, the 2nd complainant was afflicted with a lethal ailment which awfully affected the complainants' financial solidity. Resultantly, the complainants could not continue effecting repayment of the loan. The opposite party resorted to proceedings under SARF ASI Act against the complainant. The complainant approached the Regional Manager of the opposite party, and the complainants were allowed to remit Rs.375000/-(Rupees three lakhs seventy five thousand only ) as full and final settlement to close the loan account. The complainants on 7th May 2008 remitted Rs.375000/-(Rupees three lakhs seventy five thousand only ) and closed the material loan account. Notwithstanding the material loan being closed, the opposite party was reluctant to hand back the title' deed and other documents to the complainants. The complainants on umpteen occasions visited the opposite party and demanded the documents. The opposite party purposefully declined to disburse the documents to the complainants. The opposite party's service is deficient. The complainants sustained mental agony. Got aggrieved on this, the complainant approached this Forum for compensation and relief.
2. On notice being sent, the opposite party turned up and filed version. The opposite party contends that the complainants did not discharge the liability in time. With the result, the opposite party initiated proceedings under SARFASI Act. At this point of time, the complainants fraudulently alienated the property to one Mr. Satheesan vide sale deed No.1912/2008. Later, the purchaser approached the opposite party and cleared off the charge of the opposite party over the property. The purchaser requested the opposite party to release the material documents to him. According to the opposite party, on execution of the aforesaid sale deed the complainants' title, interest and right over the property are extinguished. Also the recitals of the sale deed prohibit the Opposite party to return the documents to the complainants. In this premise, the opposite party conditionally handed over the entire documents to the purchaser of the property. The opposite party has not inflicted mental agony to the complainant. The complaint is baseless. The same is to be dismissed with cost to the opposite party, the opposite party forcefully contends.
3. The evidence of the complainant consists of the testimony of the 1st complainant and the documents Exbts Al to A3 series were marked. On the side of the opposite party, the manager of the opposite party was examined as RwI, and the documents Exbt BI to B 5 were marked .
4. Holding in mind the contentions of the parties, the questions that come up for consideration are:-
(a) Whether the complainants closed the material loan account on making payment of Rs. 375000/-(Rupees three lakhs seventy five thousand only )?
(b) Whether the complainants sold out the property to Mr.Satheesan in the midst of negotiation with the opposite party as to the loan in issue?
( c) Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of service?
5. We carefully perused the complaint, version, affidavits and other material documents placed on record by the parties. The complainants' case is that despite being the material loan being closed, the opposite party declined to disburse the documents to the complainants. On the other hand the opposite party contends that the complainants even before closing the material loan, the complainants disposed of the secured property in favor of one Mr. Satheesan, and thus the complainants stripped themselves off all rights to get back the documents from the opposite party. Going by the materials produced by the opposite party, it is unfolded that the complainants have sold out the property as opposite party alleged. The Exbt B2 sale deed unambiguously suggests that aforesaid Satheesan is the absolute owner of the material property. Exbt B5 document discloses that the purchaser of the property in issue has executed an indemnify bond in favor of the opposite party. It seems that the complainant suppressed the factum of the sale of the sale of the property from this Forum. Seemingly the complainants have approached this Forum with impure intentions. In this context, the complainants' contentions do not inspire confidence in the mind of this Forum.
6. For the forgoing facts and finding of the present case herein above, we are of the view that the complaint is liable to be dismissed, and the same is dismissed.
The complaint is disposed accordingly. The parties are left to bear with their own cost.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of March 2012.
Sd/-Sri.Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Sri.K. Anirudhan:
Sd/-Smt. N.Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Application submitted to the Vijaya Bank
Ext.A2 -Letter dated 21/04/2008 from opposite party to complainant
Ext.A3-Series-Letter dated 07.05.08
Evidence of the Opposite party:-
RW1 - Sri. S.Sashi kumar
Ext.B1- Letter dated 23.05.2008
Ext.B2-General Power of Attorney
Ext.B3- Certificate of encumbrance on property dated 26/04/08
Ext.B4- Letter given to opposite party
Ext.B5- Photocopy affidavit cum undertaking
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- sh/-
Compared by:-
