Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar – Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member:
(1) This appeal has been filed against the judgement and award passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, District Thane, on 07.08.2007 in Consumer Complaint No.317/2004. By allowing the complaint partly the District Forum directed original Opponents to pay to the Complainant a sum of `15,000/- for mental harassment and `2,000/- towards costs.
(2) Facts lie in narrow compass. Complainant had filed consumer complaint against the Opponent – I.C.I.C.I. Home Finance Co. Ltd.. Complainant’s grievance was that she had given some original documents to the Opponent while procuring loan from them. When after few days she needed those original documents, she approached Opponents. Opponents admitted that the original title deed given by the Complainant was not traceable in their office. The Opponents gave letter dated 07.07.2007 in writing to that effect on 13.03.2006 and expressed regret. The Complainant therefore filed consumer complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opponents.
(3) The Opponents filed written version and contested the claim. It was the stand taken by the Opponent in the written version that the original papers were lodged by the Complainant in H.D.F.C. Bank from whom Complainant had earlier taken bank loan. It was the contention of the I.C.I.C.I. Home Finance Co. that they had not received original title deeds from the H.D.F.C. Bank. On behalf of Complainant they had made correspondence to that effect with the H.D.F.C. Bank. They had even sent letter dated 21.07.2006 to H.D.F.C. Bank to give original title deed to them, but there was no response. Therefore, it was pleaded by the Opponents that they were not having title deed of the Complainant and therefore, they were not guilty of deficiency in service. They therefore prayed that complaint should be dismissed with costs.
(4) On considering the affidavits and documents placed on record by the rival parties, the District Forum simply relied upon the letter dated 13th March, 2006 issued by I.C.I.C.I Bank to the Complainant wherein they categorically admitted that the original title deed of her home loan was not traceable at their end and regretted for the inconvenience caused to them and they were taking steps to recreate the same. Acting on this letter itself the District Forum passed award and directed Appellant to pay `15,000/- to the Complainant by way of mental harassment and `2,000/- by way of costs. As such, I.C.I.C.I. Home Finance Co. has filed this appeal.
(5) We heard Mr.P.B. Kadam, Advocate a/w Ms.Leena Sawant, Advocate for the Appellant and Mr.Pravartak Pathak, Advocate, proxy for Mr.Uday Warunjikar, Advocate for the Respondent.
(6) We are satisfied with the order passed by the District Forum. The said order is sustainable in law. We find no merit in the appeal filed by the original Opponents for the simple reason that they themselves admitted in the letter mentioned supra that at their end original title deed procured by the Complainant was not traceable. They even expressed regret for the inconvenience caused to the Respondent. This letter itself is appearing to be a death nail to the case of the Appellant. In the circumstances, we find that there is no merit in the appeal. Appeal is liable to be dismissed. Hence, we pass the following order:
O R D E R
(i) Appeal stands dismissed.
(ii) No order as to costs.
(iii) Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced on 1st March, 2011.
