By. Sri. Jose. V. Thannikode, President:

The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 to get back the document which is deposited in the opposite parties bank after closing the entire balance.

2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant's are the Legal Heirs of Mr. Silvester Dizuza, who died on 19.02.2009 who had availed Rs.10,000/- from opposite parties as loan and repaid all the principal amount including the interest. When the complainants asked to return back the document which is mortgaged at the time of availing loan, the opposite parties told that the Silvester Dizuza availed a loan of Rs.20,000/- and not refunded any amount and if the principal amount and all the interest is remitted the documents will be returned to the complainants and further stated that the opposite parties unauthoriously retained the documents and the complainants further stated that on enquiry it is understood that the opposite parties Bank staff misappropriated the complainants loan account and retained the documents. Complainants further submits that this is a clear deficiency of service and unfair trade practice and prayed before the Forum to direct the opposite parties to return the documents and to pay cost and compensation for the hardships caused to the complainants.

3. On receipt of the complaint, notices was served to opposite parties and opposite parties filed version denying all the averments in the complaint and stated that the Silvester Dezuza availed a loan of Rs.20,000/- and not repaid any amount.  Hence the opposite party filed ARC as No.368/98 and it is decreed against complainant for Rs.36,886/- on 01.05.1998 and thereafter Silvester Dezuza repaid only an amount of Rs.14,005/- to the opposite parties and Rs.22,881/- is remained balance on that date and he is liable for the interest thereafter from 31.03.2000 onwards and further stated they have not made any unfair trade practice and ready to return the documents if the entire amount is remitted and prayed before the Forum to dismiss the complaint with compensatory cost to this opposite party.

4. On analyzing the complaint, version and affidavits the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-

                        1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties?

         2. Relief and Cost.

5. Point No.1:- In addition to the complaint the complainant filed proof affidavit and stated as stated in the complaint and she is examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 and A2 is marked. From the side of opposite parties also filed proof affidavit and he is examined as OPW1 and Exts.B1 to B3 is marked. Ext.A1 is the Family member Certificate of Mr. Silvester Dizuza. Ext.A2 is the Death Certificate of Mr. Silvester Dizuza. Ext.B1 is the Contract between opposite parties and Ligori Dizuza, the loan amount is shows as Rs.20,000/-. Ext.B2 is the “Jaamyakada Vaaypa Aadharam”, wherein loanee’s name is written as LIGORI Dizuza and Loan number is B188 and availed loan amount is Rs.20,000/- and interest rate is written as 19_1/2 % and the repayment is fixed within 3 years and S. Dizuza name and thumb impression can be seen and two witnesses called one P. Kadher and K.T. Hari is cited. Ext.B3 is the loan Ledger extract of S. Dizuza (original) wherein somany corrections, addings, erasings can be seen, where “Pathinayiram”(Malayalam word) is written in starting upper portion of pathinayiram the word   “iru”(Malayalam word) is added and one place E.P filed P-10,000/- can be seen, and first line of the ledger page is seems erased and in the third line to 6^th line some entries also seen erased which resulted some holes in the paper and in the repayment column and the interest column amount is over written and the date also over written and it is totally confusing.  The corrections and erasing in the important loan ledger coupled with the deposition of OPW1 in second page  “There are several criminal and civil cases pending against the staff of the opposite party’s bank with respect to misappropriation of Bank’s money.  Among these cases, different courts have convicted the staff and now appeal is pending.  Among these who have convicted included Accountant and Clerk of the Bank.  The conviction is based on the misappropriation of money by the staff during the period 1990-2000.  Some of the criminal cases are still pending”  the Forum found that the corrections and erasings made in the Ledger Book is a grave offence and is a clear case of unfair trade practice.

6.  Under the above circumstances we came into a conclusion that the complainant availed only a loan of Rs.10,000/- from the opposite parties and the repayment of Rs.14,005/- is admitted by opposite parties in their version and affidavit.  So we are in the opinion that forgering of an important document is a serious crime and at this instance, non return of the mortgaged document is a clear case of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.  Hence the Point No.1 is found accordingly.

7.  Point No.2:- Since the Point No.1 is found against the opposite parties the opposite parties are liable to return back the document and to pay cost and compensation and the complainant is entitled for the same.  The Point No.2 is found accordingly.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to return back the mortgaged document in the above case and also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) as compensation and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) as cost of this proceedings.  The opposite parties should comply the Order within one month from the date of receipt of this Order.  Thereafter the complainant is entitled for an interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the whole amounts.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 29^th day of November 2014.

Date of Filing: 17.05.2012.

PRESIDENT      :Sd/-

MEMBER         :Sd/-

MEMBER          :Sd/-

/True Copy/

                                                                                                   Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

APPENDIX.

Witness for the Complainant:-

PW1.                Ireena.                                                 Housewife(Complainant).

Witness for the opposite Parties:-

OPW1.             Thomas. P. O.                                      Clerk, Moopainadu Service Co-operative

                                                                                             Bank Ltd.

Exhibits for the Complainant:-

A1.                   Copy of Family Member Certificate.              Dt:18.08.2009.

A2.                   Copy of Death Certificate.                              Dt:06.12.2012.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:-

B1.                   Contract.                                                         Dt:31.03.1994.

B2.                   Jaamyakada Vaaypa Aadharam.

B3.                   Copy of Loan Ledger Exract.

         Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.