J K Rathinakani filed a consumer case on 02 Jan 2023 against The Commissioner Civil Supplies in the South Chennai Consumer Court. The case no is CC/280/2018 and the judgment uploaded on 10 Apr 2023.
Date of Complaint Filed : 18.06.2018
Date of Reservation : 16.12.2022
Date of Order : 02.01.2023
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.
PRESENT: TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L., : PRESIDENT
THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L., : MEMBER I
THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA., : MEMBER II
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 280/2018
MONDAY, THE 2nd DAY OF JANUARY 2023
J.K. Thangarathinakani,
Door No.11, Plot No.145,
5th Street, Thirumalai Nagar,
Asthinapuram,
Chennai – 600 064. … Complainant
-Vs-
Director,
Tamil Nadu Consumer Goods Trading Corporation,
12, Thambu Sami Road,
Kilpauk,
Chennai – 600 010. ... Opposite Party
******
Counsel for the Complainant : M/s. S.Raman
Counsel for the Opposite Party : M/s. K. Sambasivam
On perusal of records and upon treating the written arguments as oral arguments on endorsement made by the Complainant, we delivered the following:
ORDER
Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,
1. The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the Opposite Party to cancel the Mortgage Deed and to return the original documents along with compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for the mental agony caused to the Complainant.
2. The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-
The Complainant submitted that she joined as a Stenographer on 24.06.1977 in the Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Head Office, Chennai-10 and on getting promotions in various posts and after serving various regions has attained superannuation on 31.03.2011 and relieved from service as Deputy Manager vide proceedings of the Managing Director vide No.AE7/8858/2010 dated 23.03.2011 and vide proceedings Na.Ka No.A1/13043/2010 dated 30.03.2011 passed by the Senior Regional Manager from Chennai South, Region. When the Complainant was working at the head office she availed a sum of Rs.93,000/- as advance for purchase of plot vide head office file No.F3/493/88 and also availed 16,000/- as additional house building advance and another additional advance of Rs.2,00,000/- was provided to the Complainant by the Regional Manager, Vellore vide Proceedings bearing No.Na.Ka.No.E3/5770/99 dated 29.02.2000 and in furtherance the Sale Deed and Mortgage Deed of the Complainant’s house site along with file was sent to the Regional Office Vellore from the Head Office. For the aforesaid loans a Mortgage Deed inrespect of the property belonging to the Complainant was created by the General Manager (administration), Chennai-10 and the principal and interest for the said loan was deducted from the salary of the Complainant, while working in various regions on promotions. Further the Complainant was relieved from the service after attaining superannuation on settlement of entire dues vide proceedings No.AE7/8858/2010 dated 23.03.2011 and vide proceedings Na.Ka.No.A1/13043/2010 dated 30.03.2011. The Complainant after accounts audit had received all the retirement benefits. While so after retirement the Complainant sought for release of mortgage and in furtherance of which the Regional Office, Chennai South Gopalapuram, Chennai-86 had informed that they had advised the Regional Manager, Vellore by letter Na.Ka.No.A6/735/11 dated 06.07.2011 to handover the Sale Deed and related documents to the Complainant.
On an RTI Application filed by the Complainant on 08.05.2013 to the Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Gopalapuram, Chennai – 86, they had informed by letter Na.Ka.No. A5/3643/13 dated 05.06.2013 that a sum of Rs.6893/- was due from the Complainant and on payment of the said amounts she could get the original document from the Regional Office, Vellore. Accordingly, the Complainant had paid a sum of Rs.6893/- to the Deputy Manager(Accounts) Vellore, vide Receipt No.0142 dated 03.07.2013 and claimed for the Sale Deed and Mortage Deed. However the documents were not handed over to the Complainant. Further by RTI Application dated 12.02.2014 to the Public Information Officer, the Complainant had sought the reason for non furnishing of the documents to her, she was informed that it was sent to Head Office for further proceedings. Contrarily the Public Information Officer, Regional Office, Chennai South by Na.Ka.No.A5/3643/13 dated 03.03.2014 had informed that her application was sent to Regional Office Vellore on 25.02.2014. The Complainant was made to run between Regional Office Vellore and Head Office, Chennai and the Regional Office, Chennai South causing mental agony and stress to her. In the meanwhile as per the request of the Complainant she was given a copy of the Mortgage Deed by letter Na.Ka.No.E3/3306/2011 dated 14.04.2014. On 07.05.2013 the Complainant had given representations to the Head Office and the Chief Minister Cell. The Managing director Tamil Civil Supplies Corporation, Chennai, 10 by letter No.AE8/20587/2011 dated 03.06.2014 had stated that they would gather information regarding the details of the amounts deducted from her salary in various regions. Even after 4 years of retirement from 13.03.2011 she was not informed about the amounts recovered from her. By letter Na.Ka.NO.E3/3306/11 dated 22.09.2016 the Regional Manager, Vellore had informed the Complainant to get the copy of documents which they have obtained from the Sub Registrar Office, Tambaram Chennai and on 27.09.2016 the
Complainant received the copy of the document, which is not a certified copy. The Complainant was informed by Na.Ka. E3/3306/11 dated 16.11.2016 that the documents were lost while in transit by post and hence copy of the documents was furnished to the Complainant. By letter Na.Ka.No.AE8/20587/2011 dated 09.06.2017 the General Manager (Administration), Chennai-10 had informed the Sub Registrar, Chennai -45 that the Complainant had paid the entire loan amount and that the Mortgage Deed bearing document No.4509/1988 executed in favour of the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation is to be cancelled. Further the Complainant was given the copy of FIR, paper publication and the Police Report in respect of the lost Mortgage Deed by the Regional Manager, Vellore vide letter Na.Ka.No.E38/3306/11 dated 17.11.2011. After receiving the balance amount of Rs.6893/- the Opposite Party had not handed over the original documents to the Complainant even after 8 years of retirement. Hence the complaint.
3. Written Version filed by the Opposite Parties in brief are as follows:-
The Complainant has retired from Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Chennai, South Region on 31.03.2011 as Deputy Manager. She has received a sum of Rs.3,09,000/- for his house construction. The details are given here below:
Date | Amount |
1.Advance for House Construction Proccedings of Head Office bearing No.F3/493/88, dated 01.02.1988, 26.09.1988 & 24.11.1988 (Rs.18600+22320+29760+22320 = Rs.93,000/-) | 93,000/- |
2.Additional advance for House Construction Proceedings of Head Office bearing No.F3/493/1988, Date 19.07.89 | 16,000/- |
3.Advance for House Extension Proccedings of Vellore Region bearing No.B3/5770/99, dated 29.02.2000 and 23.05.2002 |
2,00,000/- |
Total | 3,09,000/- |
During her tenure she had worked in Head Office, Thanjavur, Tiruvarur, Thuthukudi, Virudhu Nagar, Tirunelveli, Vellore, Kancheepuram, Chennai (North), Nagapattinam, Cuddalore and Chennai (South) . During the period, the principal and interest amount was deducted for the advance amount obtained for House construction . When the Complainant was working in the Head Office and Vellore Zone, loan for a sum of Rs.3,09,000/- had been issued to the Complainant. When she was working in Head office the advance amount for construction of house was provided to the Complainant in two instalments of Rs.93,000/- and Rs.16,000/- amounting to Rs.1,09,000/-. For which a sum of Rs.1,09,000/- towards principal and a sum of Rs.81,960/- towards interest was deducted. Further the Complainant while working in Vellore she obtained loan for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. For the said loan the principal amount of Rs.2,00,000/- has been deducted and the interest has not been deducted. While so the Chennai (North) Region had calculated the interest amount for Rs.2,00,000/- at Rs.81,937.50/-.
Further a sum of Rs.3,15,000/- was deducted from the salary of the Complainant while she was working in the Corporation for the Home loan availed by her. A sum of Rs.81,937.50 is payable by the Complainant towards interest. After deducting a sum of Rs.6000/- which was collected in excess for the principal amount from the total due of 81,937.50, a sum of Rs.75,937.50 is still due and payable by the Complainant. On payment of the said amount the Opposite Party would take action to release the Mortgage Deed.
4. The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents were marked as Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-21. The Opposite Party submitted its Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Opposite Party, documents were marked as Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-3.
Points for Consideration:-
1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?
3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?
Point No.1
The undisputed facts are that the Complainant had availed loan while she was working at the Head office, Chennai in two instalments of Rs.93,000/- and Rs.16,000/-. For the said loans the Complainant had executed a Mortage Deed in respect of her property. Further she has availed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- while working in Vellore. She had retired from service on 30.03.2011 and had received all the retirement benefits. Subsequently the complainant sought for release of the Mortgage from the Opposite Party and to hand over the Sale Deed and Documents submitted by the Complainant to the Opposite Party at the time of availing loan.
The dispute arose when the Opposite Party claim a sum of Rs.81,937.50 which is due and payable by the Complainant towards the interest and on payment of the said amount the Opposite Party would execute release of Mortage Deed.
On various representations made by the Complainant the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Chennai (South) Region by letter dated Na.Ka.No.A5/3643/2013 dated 05.06.2013, Ex.A-7, had informed that a sum of Rs.6893/- was due from the Complainant and on payment of Rs.6893/-, the Complainant could receive the original documents from the Regional Office, Vellore. Pursuant to which the Complainant had paid a sum of Rs.6893/- to the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Vellore Region as seen from Ex.A-8, the receipt bearing No.0142 dated 03.07.2013. On payment of the balance amount of Rs.6893/- the Complainant again made a representation dated 12.02.2014, for return of documents as found in Ex.A-9.
Whileso on 16.11.2016 the Complainant had received a letter from the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Vellore Region stating that the original document sent to Chennai (South) Region by courier was lost in transit and hence the copy of document obtained from the Sub Registrar Office Tambaram was handed over to the Complainant on 27.09.2016. As per Ex.A-18 the Opposite Party had written a letter informing the Sub Registrar, Tambaram that the complainant had paid the entire principal and interest towards the loans availed by her while she was working with the Opposite Party and therefore to cancel the Mortgage Deed executed in favour of the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation by the Complainant. The Opposite Party had given Paper Advertisement regarding the missing of document belonging to the Complainant and had taken steps to register FIR in order to get the release of Mortgage Deed.
While so the Opposite Party has come with a new plea in the Written version that a sum of Rs.81,937.50 is due and payable by the Complainant and on payment they would take action for the release of Mortgage Deed.
The Complainant was made to run from pillar to post for so many years after retirement without handing over the original deeds belonging to the Complainant in respect of her property and after receiving the entire loan amount had not released the Mortgage Deed executed in favour of the Opposite Party. In view of the discussions made above and on perusal of records, this commission is of the considered view that the contention of the Opposite Party that a sum of Rs.81,937.50 is due and payable by the Complainant is not sustainable as the Opposite Party by their communications had admitted that the Complainant had cleared the entire loan amount and hence the failure of the Opposite Party to return the original documents and release of Mortgage after receiving the entire payments towards the loan from the Complainant which amounts to deficiency in service. Accordingly Point No.1 is answered in favour of the Complainant.
Point Nos.2 &3:-
As discussed and decided in Point No.1 the Opposite Party is liable to release the Mortgage Deed executed by the Complainant in favour of the Opposite Party and to return the original documents to the Complainant submitted at the time of availing loan and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the deficiency in service and mental agony caused to the complainant along with cost of Rs.10,000/-. Accordingly, Point Nos.2 and 3 are answered.
In the result, the complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Party is directed to release the Mortgage Deed executed by the Complainant in favour of the Opposite Party and to return the original documents to the Complainant submitted at the time of availing loan and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) as compensation for the deficiency in service and mental agony caused to the complainant along with cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above amount of Rs.50,000/- shall carry interest @9% p.a from the date of receipt of this order till the date of realization.
In the result this complaint is allowed.
Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 2nd of January 2023.
S. NANDAGOPALAN T.R. SIVAKUMHAR B.JIJAA
MEMBER II MEMBER I PRESIDENT
List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-
Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 | 23.03.2011 | Proceedings of the Managing Director, TNCSC Head Office 12, Thambubusamy Road, Kilpauk, Chennai. |
Ex.A3 | 30.03.2011 | Proceedings of the Regional Manager TNCSC, Chennai South Region, Chennai – 86. |
Ex.A4 | 29.02.2000 | Proceedings of the Regional Manager TNCSC. |
Ex.A5 | 06.07.2011 | Copy of Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation |
Ex.A6 | 08.05.2013 | Copy of letter along with acknowledgement card |
Ex.A7 | 05.06.2013 | Copy of Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation |
Ex.A8 | 03.07.2013 | Copy of Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Vellore Region |
Ex.A9 | 12.02.2014 | Copy of letter along with acknowledgement card |
Ex.A10 | 26.03.2014 | Copy of the Zonal Manager (South), Tamilnadu Consumer Trading Corporation, Chennai -86. |
Ex.A11 | 03.03.2014 | Copy of the Zonal Manager (South), Tamilnadu Consumer Trading Corporation, Chennai -86. |
Ex.A12 | 17.04.2014 | Copy of the Tamilnadu Consumer goods Trading Corporation. |
Ex.A13 and Ex.A-14 | 07.05.2014 | Copy of letter |
Ex.A15 | 03.06.2014 | Copy of letter |
Ex.A16 | 22.09.2016 | Copy of the Tamilnadu Consumer goods Trading Corporation. |
Ex.A17 | 16.11.2016 | Copy of the Tamilnadu Consumer goods Trading Corporation. |
Ex.A18 | 09.06.2017 | Copy of the Tamilnadu Consumer goods Trading Corporation. |
Ex.A19 | 17.11.2017 | Copy of the Tamilnadu Consumer goods Trading Corporation. |
Ex.A20 | - | Copy of Registration Department |
Ex.A21 | 15.05.2018 | Copy of Notice |
List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:-
Ex.B1 | - | Copy of Entries |
Ex.B2 | - | Copy of Entries |
Ex.B3 | 29.02.2000 | Proceedings of the Regional Manager |
S. NANDAGOPALAN T.R. SIVAKUMHAR B.JIJAA
MEMBER II MEMBER I PRESIDENT
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.