Date of Filing:16.04.2008<br /> Date of Order:29.07.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 29TH DAY OF JULY 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 961 OF 2008<br /> <br /> Smt. Alice Carrie,<br /> Carrie Farm, Tharabanahalli,<br /> Chikkajala Post, <br /> Bangalore-560157. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> 1. The General Manager,<br /> Corporation Bank,<br /> No. 45/3, Residency Cross Road,<br /> Bangalore 560 025.<br /> <br /> 2. The General Manager,<br /> Corporation Bank,<br /> Asset Recovery Branch,<br /> No. 14/15, K. Kamaraj Road,<br /> Bangalore 560 042. <br /> <br /> 3. The Chairman,<br /> Corporation Bank,<br /> Head Office: Mangalore. Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> The facts of the case are that, the complainant had taken loan from opposite party Bank and she has cleared the entire loan. The opposite party Bank had returned all the original documents except original sale deed dated 9/11/1978. Complainant has cleared the entire outstanding loan dues to the Bank. The opposite party is legally bound to return the original sale deed to the complainant. The certified copy cannot substitute the original document. The complainant is continuously approaching the opposite party and requesting to return the original sale deed. The opposite party staffs are promising to search for the document. The act of the opposite party in not returning the original sale deed amounts to a deficiency in service. Complainant got issued legal notice. In spite of legal notice the opposite party has not returned the original sale deed. Therefore, the complainant has prayed that opposite party may be directed to return the original sale deed alternatively to pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to the complainant for mental agony and hardship.<br /> 2. Notice issued to opposite parties. Opposite parties put in appearance through advocate and filed defence version admitting almost all the facts. The opposite party submitted that, original sale deed was produced before the Hon’ble Civil Court. While taking back the document from the court the original sale deed was not available in the documents returned by the court. Therefore, the opposite party applied for certified copy of the document and handed over the certified copy of the sale deed to the complainant. The opposite party is searching for the original sale deed and on its tracing same will be returned to the complainant. Opposite party submitted that it has informed the complainant that the original sale deed is not traceable and once it is traced same will be returned to the complainant. <br /> 3. Arguments are heard.<br /> 4. The point for consideration is:-<br /> Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?<br /> REASONS<br /> 5. I have gone through the complaint, defence version and documents. As per the defence version almost all the facts are admitted. There is no dispute whatsoever between the parties on the point that the complainant obtained loan from the opposite party Bank and loan was cleared. The complainant had received all the documents except original sale deed dated 9/11/1978. The opposite party Bank has clearly admitted in the defence version that the said original document has not been returned to the complainant and search is going on for the said document and after tracing the said document it will be returned to the complainant. Therefore, it is very clear that the opposite party Bank is not careful in handling the original document. It is the duty and obligation of the opposite party Bank to return all the original documents to the complainant once the loan is cleared. But unfortunately in this case the opposite party Bank has failed in its duty in not returning the original sale deed which is an important document. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the complainant that on account of want of original sale deed the complainant is not in a position to sell the property and she is not in a position to obtain loan from the Banks. Therefore, it has become very difficult for the complainant to make any transactions. The complainant is suffering mentally and financially since the Bank has failed to return the original sale deed of her property. The learned advocate submitted that suitable compensation may be awarded for the complainant since it is a case of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party Bank. There is a considerable force and merit in the arguments advanced by the learned advocate for the complainant. Since the original document is not returned to the complainant and search is still going on, the opposite party Bank submitted that as soon as the documents traced out, it will be returned to the complainant. This undertaking will not absolve the responsibility of the opposite party Bank. The complainant cannot be asked to wait indefinitely to get the original sale deed. Therefore, it is a definite case of deficiency in service. Therefore, the complainant shall be suitably compensated. Consumer Protection Act is enacted to protect the better interest of the consumers. In this case, the opposite party Bank has failed in its duty in not returning the original sale deed. The opposite party Bank shall be directed to issue a certificate to the complainant stating that original sale deed dated 9/11/1978 was produced for obtaining loan and same was not returned to the complainant since it was lost or not traced. The opposite party Bank shall also be directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant for deficiency in service. The opposite party Bank shall also be directed to return the original sale deed if it is traced. If these three reliefs are granted, in that case I feel it will meet the ends of justice. In the result I proceed to pass the following:- <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. The Complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party Bank is directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.<br /> 7. The opposite party Bank is directed to give a certificate to the complainant stating that original sale deed was produced before the Bank for obtaining loan and same was not returned to the complainant since it was lost or not traced. <br /> 8. The opposite party Bank is also directed to hand over or return back the original sale deed to the complainant whenever it is traced. <br /> 9. The opposite party Bank is also directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- as costs to the present proceedings.<br /> 10. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 11. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 29TH DAY OF JULY 2008. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br />