BFEORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER

       DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BAGALKOT.

COMPLAINT NO. 23/2017
DATE OF FILING: 12/04/2017

                                                                                      Date: 22^nd day of September, 2018

   P r e  s e n t: 

01) Smt.Sharada.K.                                                    President…

     B.A.LL.B. (Spl) 

02) Smt. Sumangala.C.Hadli.                         Lady   Member…

                            B.A (Music)

                V/s

     JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY SMT.SHARADA.K., PRESIDENT

The Complainant has filed this complaint against the Opposite Party (herein after referred in short as OP) U/sec.12 of Consumer protection Act 1986, seeking direction to OPs to return back all the original documents pledged and mortgaged with O.Ps. by the complainant at the time of availing the house construction loan and  Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.10,000/- towards the cost of this complaint and any other relief as the Forum deems fit under the circumstances of the case.

2.   Brief facts of the case are as follows:

       The complainant filed this complaint against the OP’s alleging that the complainant was the officer at O.P. No.1’s Bank and he had availed a house construction loan from O.P.1 Bank by mortgaging/pleading the original documents in regard to the above loan and the original documents pledged/mortgaged with O.P. No.1)Original Registered Sale deed bearing CTS No.5634/39 measuring 216 Sq. Mtrs. 2) Original building permission, 3) Property registered extract, 4) Original plan approved by the CMC Banahatti, 5) Encumbrance Certificate of the plot and Tax paid receipt of the property which is situated at Banahatti, Tq: Jamakhandi Dist. Bagalkot. Complainant further submits that, complainant has been re-paid all the outstanding house construction loan bearing No.10815443295 and 10815442815 respectively on 01/12/2014 and complainant is requesting O.Ps. authority to return Back the original documents pledged/mortgaged. Complainant had submitted so many request applications for returning the documents. O.Ps. have turned their deaf ears towards the complainant, and to note that after receiving so many request applications from the complainant. The O.Ps. have issued one letter No.MISC/HTL/14 dtd: 13/07/2015 stating that “O.Ps. have put their sincere effort in searching the original pledged/mortgaged house property documents” same are not traceable. Because the original documents are rights of the owner and if they are lost the complainant cannot claim anything on the said property and that will be treated as property of un-authorized and illegal one. This amounts to deficiency and unfair trade practice of the O.Ps. Hence complainant issued the legal notice through his counsel, legal notices were sent to the both the O.Ps. O.P.1 had sent one more letter bearing No.RM-V-Misc-62 dated 08/03/2017 stating that still their searching for the property documents had taken up, the matter with their controlling authorities and seeking the approval to apply for certified copies of the said documents as per the procedure. The complainant visited the O.Ps. offices several times and requested them orally and in writing to return back the original documents  which are very important and valuable assets and without the original documents, even there is chance of loosing the ownership of the property, if any one by creating such false or fake documents claims over the said property. The complainant has suffered lot and visited the O.Ps. Bank several times. Hence, complainant has filed the present Complaint.       

3.      After receipt of notice, the OP-Counsel present before the Forum and filed Written Version of Ops.

        Written Version of OPs are as hereunder:

          The OPs submits that the complaint of the complainant is false, frivolous and the same is not admitted by this O.P. except those which are specifically admitted. It is true that the complainant is the Ex-Officer of O.P. Bank and he had availed house building loan and has pledged the relevant documents while obtaining the loan. It is also true that the complainant made request application for getting the documents in return and it is false to state that the O.P. Bank has washed its hands stating that the original documents are lost. It is also false that the complainant cannot claim any right on his property in the absence of the documents pledged with the Bank and O.P. further contended that the complainant is consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act. Unless complainant fulfils all the terms of agreement executed by him and complainant cannot termed as a consumer of the O.P. and there is no cause of action to file the complaint. That which is alleged in the complaint is imaginary. O.Ps. further contended that the complainant has suffered mental agony and got harassed in the O.P. and it is false to state that there is lapse in service by the O.P. and the O.P. has rendered the best available service to the complainant. The complainant being the Ex-Employee of O.P. Bank is well aware of the procedures in the Bank. The documents pledged by any party will not be lost, but it is possible that they might have been misplaced in another file due to mishandling by some of the employees. There is no malafide intention on the part of the Bank in misplacing documents pertaining to the complainant.  O.P. further contended that complainant himself has stated in his letter dated 27/07/2015 that he is ready to accept the certified copy of sale deed with the confirmation from the Branch that the original sale deed has been misplaced and with a further assurance that loan are advanced will be sanctioned whenever required by Equitable Mortgage against deposit of title deeds in the form of certified copy and O.P. Bank consistently has stated that it is making strenuous efforts in making a thorough and sincere search of the documents pledged, the complainant with no cause of action hurriedly has filed this complaint. O.P. prayed that the Hon’ble Forum be pleased to dismiss the complaint of the complainant awarding compensatory costs to this O.P. in the interest of justice and equity.

4.     The complainant has filed his chief affidavit along with  Xerox copy of the documents, behalf of the complainant. The documents are as follows:

1.      Complainant request letter to O.P.1,

2.      Complainant’s request to Chief General Manager SBI H.O. Bangalore,

3.      O.P. No.1’s letter to complainant dt: 13/07/2015,

4.      Complainant request letter to O.P. No.1 dt: 27/07/2015,

5.      Complainant  request letter to O.P. No.2 dt: 05/01/2017,

6.      Complainant  request letter to O.P. No.2 dt: 28/01/2017,

7.      Property Extract of Complainant property dt: 06/6/1997,

8.      Registered Sale Deed dtd : 21/08/1996,

9.      Postal Receipts two dated 22/02/2017,

10.    Legal Notice dt: 22/02/2017

11.    Postal Acknowledgement of O.P.2

12.    Reply notice of O.P.No.1 dt: 08/03/2017.

5.      On the other hand OP’s filed their Chief affidavit along with Xerox copy of the documents and the documents are as follows:

1.      Acknowledgment issued by Banahatti Police Station to the Bank.

2.      Paper publication in Prajavani Kannada daily newspaper regarding lost of the document of the complainant.

3.      Paper publication in Indian Express daily newspaper regarding lost of the documents of complainant.

          6.      After considering the material placed on record, heard the argument of both parties and perused the pleadings of the parties, our answer to the above points are as follows:

1. Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the Ops as alleged by the complainant?
2. What order?

7.    Our Answer to the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1- Affirmative,

Point No.2- As per final order.

R E A S O N S

8. POINT NO.1: Without repeating the facts mentioned at the beginnings it has been  proved by the complainant that, he has original documents pledged/mortgaged with the O.P.No.1 i.e. 1) Original registered sale deed bearing CTS No.5634/39 measuring 2016 Sq Mtrs. 2) Original building permission, 3) Property registered extract, 4) Original Plan approved by the CMC Banahatti, 5) Encumbrance Certificate of the plot and Tax paid receipt of the above property which is situated at Banahatti Tq: Jamakhandi, Dist. Bagalkot and after complainant repaid all the outstanding house construction loan on 01/12/2014 the complainant requested the O.P. to return the above original documents pledged/mortaged. Inspite of that opponent went on postphone the same by assigning one or the other reasons. Therefore the complainant got issued legal notice through his counsel and the said notice was duly served to the O.Ps. Inspite stated that, the original pledged/mortgaged house property documents same are not traceable and O.P. argued that the O.P.No.1 Bank is well aware of the procedures in Bank. The documents pledged by any party will not lost, but it is possible that they might have been misplaced in another file due to mishandling by someone employees. Hence perusal of documents and complaint has not heed denied or disputed by the O.Ps. Hence considering the facts alleged in complaint as well as stated by complainant in the affidavit which corroborated by the documents has been proved. Furthermore the complainant also produced decision reported.

[2017] CJ 189 (N.C.)

In the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi. Bank of India V/s. Mustafa Ibrahim Nadiadwala.

Consumer Protection Act, 1986-Sections 17, 19 and 21-Banking and financial services-Term loan-Deficiency in service-Original documents not returned by bank despite repayment of loan amount-There has been deficiency in service on part of Bank towards complainant as title deeds had been lost from their custody only-Bank is liable to compensate complainant suitably in this regard-Compensation of Rs.5 Lakhs awarded. (Paras 9 to 13) (2009) 5 SCC 121-Distinguished.

Important Point:

“Bank is bound to return original documents after repayment of loan amount.”

The ratio of the above case is also aptly applicable the present case on hand. As per the available evidence on recorded the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.No.1. Hence we answer point No.1 partly in the affirmative.

9.      POINT NO: 2: For the reasons and discussion made above and finding on the above points, we proceed to pass the following:

O R D E R

The complaint is partly allowed.

Directed the O.P. No.1 to return back all the original documents pledged/mortgaged with O.Ps. by the complainant at the time of availing the house construction loan and also entire loan is clear by the complainant.

Further the O.Ps. 1 and 2 shall pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) as mental agony and compensation and Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand rupees) towards cost of this complaint.

          Above order shall be complied within 45 days from the date of order.

          If the order is not complied within stipulated period O.P.No.1 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.100/- per day to the complainant from the date of disobedience of order till the order is complied.

Free copy of this order shall be sent to the parties immediately.

           (Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 22^nd  day of September, 2018).