Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/910/2016

Navdeep Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

LIC Housing Finance Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Baljinder Singh Tiwana adv.

01 Jun 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	910/2016
Date of Institution	:	19.10.2016
Date of Decision	:	01/06/2017

 

                                       

                                               

Navdeep Sharma s/o Late Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma through his General Power of Attorney Smt.Pramila w/o Sh.Navdeep Sharma both residents of #  184-A, St.No.6, Jujhar Nagar, Patiala.

                                ...  Complainant.

Versus

 

1.     LIC Housing Finance Ltd., SCO No.2445-46, Sector 22-c, Chandigarh through its Manager.

 

2.     LIC Housing Finance Ltd., Jeewan Prakash, 7^th Floor, P.B.No.102, 25, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi-110001 through its Managing Director.

…. Opposite Parties.

 

BEFORE:    SHRI RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

SHRI RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

 

Argued by: Sh.B.S.Tiwana, Adv. for the complainant

                 Sh.Piyush Sharma, Adv. for the OPs.

 

PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

1.         The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant through his wife and General Power of Attorney holder- Smt.Pramila wife of Sh.Navdeep Sharma.   According to the complainant, his mother namely Smt.Swaran Lata w/o Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma availed the housing loan to the tune of Rs.4 lacs vide application No.14725554, having loan A/c No.14014004832 from the OPs by mortgaging the original sale deed No.6040 dated 30.08.1999.  Smt.Swaran Lata w/o Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma, mother of the complainant expired in the year 2006 whereas Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma, father of the complainant passed away in the year 2012. The elder son of Smt.Swaran Lata w/o Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma namely Sh.Anil Kumar Sharma also passed away in the year 2013. It has further been averred that after the death of the family members, the complainant stepped into the shoes of his mother Smt.Swaran Lata w/o Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma and he paid the entire loan amount including interest/expenses to the OPs on 07.09.2015.  It has further been averred that the OPs have also issued clearance certificate in respect of the loan account and he was assured that the original papers i.e. the sale deed will be returned to him within 15 days.  It has further been averred that more than one year has lapsed but the OPs have failed to return the original sale deed despite his requests. Finally, he got served a legal notice dated 06.07.2016 upon the OPs but to no effect.  Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
2.         In their written statement, OPs took a preliminary objection that the complainant is not a consumer qua them. It has been admitted that the mother of the complainant has availed the loan of Rs.4 lacs by mortgaging the sale deed No.6040 dated 30.08.1999.  It has also been admitted that the loan given to Smt.Swaran Lata stands repaid alongwith interest.  It has further been pleaded that as the loan obtained by Smt.Swaran Lata is an old loan and therefore, the sale deed is not traceable and the complainant was assured to give full co-operation and every effort is being made to trace out the same.  The remaining allegations have been denied, being false. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
3.         The complainant filed rejoinder to the written reply of the OPs controverting their stand and reiterating his own.
4.         We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents on record.
5.         After hearing the Counsel for the parties and going through the documentary evidence on record, we are of the considered view that the complaint is liable to be accepted for the reasons recorded hereinafter. The objection of the OPs that the complainant is not consumer qua the OPs is not acceptable because the mother and father of the complainant namely Smt.Swaran Lata and Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma have already expired on 07.04.2006 and 21.01.2012 respectively as is evident from the death certificates placed on record. Even the brother of the complainant namely Sh.Anil Kumar has also expired on 11.05.2013 and as such after the death of his mother namely Smt.Swaran Lata w/o Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma, the complainant, being the legal heirs of his parents, has stepped into the shoes of his mother and he is fully competent to file the present complaint against the OPs and as such he is a consumer qua the OPs and the objection of the OPs, in this regard, being devoid of any merit is rejected accordingly.
6.         Admittedly,      Smt.Swaran Lata w/o Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma has availed the loan to the tune of Rs.4 lacs by mortgaging the sale deed in question with the OPs. It is also an admitted fact that the loan availed by Smt.Swaran Lata w/o Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma has been fully repaid to the OPs.   It has fairly admitted by the Counsel for the OPs that the sale deed mortgaged against the said loan has been lost from the custody of the OPs and the same is not traceable. In our opinion, it is the bounden duty of the OPs, being the financial institution, to keep the safe custody of the documents entrusted against any loan and non-returning of such documents after repayment of the loan on the ground that the same has been lost/misplaced certainly amounts to deficiency in service on their part.  The complainant is, thus, held entitled to compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him at the hands of the OPs.
7.         In view of thes above discussion, the present complaint deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. The OPs  are directed as under:-
   1. To return the original sale deed, in question, deposited by Smt.Swaran Lata w/o Sh.Anirudh Kumar Sharma  at the time availing the loan and in the event of their failure, to issue an appropriate certificate to the complainant stating that the sale deed received against the said loan has been lost/misplaced by them. The OPs shall also lodge an FIR/DDR with the police about the loss of the sale deed. The OPs shall also get published advertisements in two national daily newspapers about the loss of sale deed of the property in question at their own expenses.  The OPs shall also write to the concerned departments about the loss of document and reimburse the expenses in obtaining the certified/duplicate copies from them to the complainant. The OPs would also render all necessary assistance to the complainant in getting the record straightened with the Registrar, where the sale deed was registered. The OPs would also take all other steps as may be required by the concerned authorities to safeguard the interest of the complainant.
   2. To pay Rs.50,000/- to the complainant as compensation for deficiency in service and negligence on their part on account of the loss of the original sale deed.
   3. To pay Rs.11,000/- to the complainant as litigation expenses.
8.         This order shall be complied with by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall be liable to pay the awarded compensation alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of this order till realization, apart from the compliance of the directions as mentioned at Sr.No.(i) and (iii).
9.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

01/06/2017 

Sd/-

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER