G.Bhaskaran, filed a consumer case on 23 Mar 2018 against The General Manager, SBI , Local Head Office, in the North Chennai Consumer Court. The case no is CC/06/2015 and the judgment uploaded on 05 Apr 2018.
Complaint presented on: 17.04.2014
Order pronounced on: 23.03.2018
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L., PRESIDENT
THIRU. M.UYIRROLI KANNAN B.B.A., B.L., MEMBER - I
FRIDAY THE 23rd DAY OF MARCH 2018
C.C.NO.06/2015
G.Bhaskar,
Plot No.22, Seeyathamman Nagar,
Balaji Street,
Vivekananda Main Road,
Kolathur, Chennai – 600 099.
….. Complainant
..Vs..
1.The General Manager,
State Bank of India,
Local Head Office,
Circle Top House,
No.16, College Lane,
Chennai – 600 006.
2. The State Bank of India,
Anna Nagar Branch,
Rep by its Branch Manager,
AG – 1, Shanthi Colony,
Chennai – 600 040.
| .....Opposite Parties |
|
Date of complaint : 07.01.2015
Counsel for Complainant : M/s. T.Sundar Rajan, Bhargavi Sundar
Rajan
Counsel for Opposite Parties : M/s. P.D.Audikesavalu, K.kumaran,
Kavitha Audikesavalu, R.Vigneswaran
O R D E R
BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,
This complaint is filed by the complainant to direct the opposite parties to pay compensation for deficiency in service u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.
1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:
The complainant along with his wife Mrs. Meena had availed a housing loan from the 2nd opposite party on 15.04.2002 under A/C.No 10181436513 for the purpose of purchase of a residential house of the said property. The complainant is the co-applicant for the said loan. From the date of availing of the loan till date of closure, the complainant has paid 110 instalments of Rs.4,339/- each amounting to Rs.4,77,290/- and a processing charge of Rs.7,600/- totally amounting to Rs.4,85,890/- towards the loan.
2. Due to a dispute between the complainant and his wife Mrs.Meena Baskar, the said Mrs.Meena Baskar had filed a Divorce Petition against the complainant on the file of the 1st Additional Family Court at Chennai in O.P.No 3152 of 2011 which is pending. He had also filed the Civil Suit C.S.No. 752 of 211 against the said Mrs. Meena Baskar on the file of the High Court, Madras for declaring that the complainant is the absolute owner of the property.
3. Due to the dispute between the complainant and his wife, he met the Manager of the 2nd opposite party and requested him not to release the title deeds of the property in equitable mortgage with the 2nd opposite party to the said Mrs.Meena Baskar in case she pre-closes the loan, without intimating the complainant, until the dispute between the complainant and his wife Mrs. Meena Baskar is resolved. The 2nd opposite party had agreed to such request and asked the complainant to send a written request with all the details. The complainant issued legal notice dated 12.12.2011 to the 2nd opposite party to refrain from realizing the documents. While so, on 23.04.2012 when the complainant had given his savings bank pass book for entry, he was shocked to see that from January 2012 his account was not debited with the loan installments. The complainant states that he made enquiries from the 2nd opposite party who had informed him that the wife of the complainant had pre closed the loan account on 20.12.2011 by paying a sum of Rs.2,09,373/- and obtained a return of the original title deeds deposited with the 2nd opposite party. The complainant is a Co-applicant of the loan A/c.No. 10181436513 and he has repaid the 110 installments of the loan and the customer of the opposite parties. The opposite party has colluded with the said Mrs. Meena Baskar and handed over the original title deeds to her, moreover during pendency of the civil suit C.S.No 752 of 2011 on the file of the High Court, Madras in which the owner of the property is yet to be decided. The complainant states that such an act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint is field to direct the opposite party to pay compensation for deficiency in service and render justice.
3. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES IN BRIEF:
The opposite parties admits that the complainant and his wife were borrowed housing loan from the opposite party. The complainant is a co-applicant and the complainants have paid the entire housing loan borrowed by them. Due to family disputes between the complainant and his wife Mrs.Meena, he had issued notice not to release the title documents to her. As the housing loan have been fully paid and completed as there is no due, the documents of the mortgaged property was returned to Mrs. Meena Baskar on 22.12.2011. Further this complaint is barred by limitation. Hence this opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service and prays to dismiss the complaint with costs.
5. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:
1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?
6. POINT NO :1
The admitted facts are that the complainant and his wife Mrs.Meena has availed a housing loan from the 2nd opposite party on 15.04.2002 in purchasing the property at No.22, Seeyathamman Nagar, Balaji Street, Vivekanadha Main Road, Kolathur, Chennai-99 was purchased in the name of Mrs. Meena and the complainant stood as co-applicant for the said loan and the loan was also fully redeemed and the complainant wrote Ex.A4 letter to the opposite party not to release the deposited titled documents to his wife till disposal of the case in CS.No.752 of 2011 filed by him against his wife on the file of Hon’ble High Court, Madras.
7. The complainant case is that he filed a Civil Suit in C.S.No. 752 of 2011 against his wife to declare that he is the absolute owner of the property purchased and the plaint copy of the said case is marked as Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 & A3 are the petition and the counter copy in the divorce proceedings between them in OP.No.31542011 and he also issued Ex.A4 notice to the opposite parties not to release the titled documents and in spite of the notice the opposite parties handed over the document to the complainant’s wife is an unfair trade practice and there by committed deficiency in service.
8. Admittedly to purchase the property a housing loan was availed from the 2nd opposite party branch and the said property was purchased in the name of complainant’s wife. In respect of the said loan, the complainant’s wife is the 1st applicant and this complainant is only a 2nd applicant. Further the loan was also redeemed and the documents were handed over to the complainant’s wife on 22.12.2011. The complainant filed the Civil Suit to declare him as an owner of the said property. Having filed the suit in the year 2011 itself he could have very well sought the relief in the suit itself restraining this opposite party not to release the document. Without doing so, the complainant after 4 years of filing the suit now alleges deficiency against the opposite party not to release the document is not sustainable. Further the opposite party released the document in favour of Mrs. Meena, who is the owner of the property and also who has deposited the document in the bank. Further the complaint is also barred by limitation, since the document returned in the year 2011 and the complaint filed in the year 2015.The opposite party had rightly returned the document to the owner of the property and therefore this opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service and accordingly this point is answered.
13. POINT NO:2
Since the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.
In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.
Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 23rd day of March 2018.
MEMBER – I PRESIDENT
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:
Ex.A1 dated 04.02.2010 Copy of Plaint C.S.No.752 of 2011
Ex.A2 dated 25.08.2011 Copy of petition in O.P.No.3152 of 2011
Ex.A3 dated 14.11.2011 Copy of counter O.P.No.3152 of 2011
Ex.A4 dated 12.12.2011 Copy of Legal Notice
Ex.A5 dated 08.05.2012 Copy of complainant Letter
Ex.A6 dated 14.05.2012 Copy of Reply letter
Ex.A7 dated 13.08.2013 Copy of Legal Notice
Ex.A8 dated NIL SBI Statement of complainant
Ex.A9 dated NIL SBI Pass Book entries of complainant
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY :
Ex.B1 dated 22.12.2011 Written Acknowledgement for receipt of title-
deeds of the mortgaged property on discharge of
loan
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.