Order No.  9  dt.  19/06/2017

          The fact of the case in brief is that in February, 1998 complainant approached the o.p. for the purpose of availing of a loan to purchase a flat measuring an area of about 562 sq.ft. being flat no. B-27, lying and situated at  101A Santosh Roy Road, Bedh Progya Complex, P.O. Barisha Sakher Bazar, Kolkata-700008. O.p. sanctioned a loan of Rs.1,75,000/- in favour of the complainant under loan account no.410022008 dated 25.02.1998. Complainant required additional finance for the registration of the said flat and for that purpose complainant once again approached  o.p. for granting loan for registration of the said flat. Accordingly an additional loan of Rs.36,500/- was sanctioned by o.p. and as such thereby aggregating the total outstanding of an amount of Rs.2,11,500/-. Upon sanctioning of the said loan facility, the complainant registered the flat on 26.05.2000 in the office of the DSR-II, Alipore vide Deed no.2520, Book No.I, Volume no.66 from pages 77 to 104. On the same date, as agreed between the parties, the complainant deposited the original IGR being no.47223 dated 26.05.2000 with the opposite party so as to enable the o.p. to collect the above mentioned original Deed of Conveyance as registered by the complainant and to retain the same till the repayment of the entire loan amount.

          As per loan agreement complainant paid EMIs @ Rs.2570/- per month and the tenure of the loan was extended to 15.06.2011. The last receipt bears confirmation of repayment of the entire loan to the o.p. Complainant was always particular in making payment of the aforesaid EMIs as per the repayment schedule agreed between the parties and he had never committed any default in making the payment since the commencement of the loan facility till the last payment made by the complainant as per the demand raised by the o.p. After the repayment of the said loan o.p. failed and/or neglected to return the original Deed of Conveyance which was kept as security by the o.p. for due performance of the agreement and/or for creation of equitable mortgage in favour of the o.p. On several occasions complainant approached the o.p. to return the original title deed of the flat but o.p. did not return the same. On 23.02.2009 complainant gave an application to o.p. to provide him with a photocopy of the registered Deed of Conveyance dated 26.05.2000. This application was honoured by the o.p.. Moreover the o.p. had charged the complainant an amount of Rs.100/- towards the Xerox charges vide their bill dated 18.03.2009. Complainant sent a letter dated 02.05.2014 to the Regional Director of o.p. demanding the release of the original Title deed. After repeated reminders and requests the o.p. issued a ‘No Objection Certificate’ on 18.08.2015 wherein it is clearly stated that the loan amount is fully repaid by the complainant. A certified copy of the original Title deed was attached to the ‘No Objection Certificate’ instead of original Title deed. On 21.08.2015 o.p.  issued a letter to the complainant which clearly stated that entire loan amount had been paid by the complainant. In reply to the letter dated 21.08.2015 complainant sent a letter dated 28.09.2015 to the Regional Director and Manager(Operation) that o.p. is duty bound to hand over the original title deed in question. But o.p. failed to return the original Title deed in question to the complainant. On 16.03.2016 complainant sent a legal notice demanding the original Title deed of the flat, but in vain. Hence the application praying for direction upon o.p. to hand over the original Title deed of the flat in question along with direction upon the o.p. to give a declaration that they have lost and /or misplaced the original Deed of Conveyance dated 26.05.2000 with compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- and cost of Rs.50,000/-.

          Upon receiving of the notice by the o.p. Ld lawyer for the o.p. appeared before this Forum on 29.07.2016 by filing power and prayed for time for w/v. Accordingly the date was fixed for filing w/v. But on that date i.e on 06.09.2016 o.p. was absent without step so the case was fixed ex-parte as against o.p.

Decision with reasons

We have gone through the complaint petition and documents in particular. It is evident from the record that complainant obtained  a housing loan from o.p. in February, 1998 and accordingly Rs.1,75,000/- was sanctioned in favour of the complainant vide loan account no.410022008 dated 25.02.1998. Complainant further approached the o.p. for sanctioning of additional loan of Rs.36,500/- and that amount was sanctioned by o.p. It is also evident from the record that the complainant registered the flat on 26.05.2000 and complainant deposited the original IGR being no.47223 dated 26.05.2000 with the opposite party. As per the agreement it was fixed that the complainant had to pay EMIs @ Rs.2570/- and the tenure of the loan was extended to 15.06.2011. Complainant paid all the EMIs regularly without making any default. Thereafter complainant prayed before o.p.  for returning the original title deed of conveyance of the flat in question. But o.p. failed to return the same. When complainant preferred  an application dated 23.02.2009 to o.p. to provide him with a photo copy of registered Deed of Conveyance dated 26.05.2000, o.p. gave the photocopy of the registered Deed of Conveyance in question along with a bill dated 18.03.2009 amounting to Rs.100/- towards Xerox charges. Therefore it is obvious that o.p. gave the photo copy of the Title Deed of Conveyance in response to the application of the complainant dated 23.02.2009. After repeated reminders and requests the o.p. issued ‘No Objection Certificate’ on 18.08.2015 i.e. after a long period of more than four years from the date of last EMI paid by the complainant but they failed to hand over the original Title Deed of Conveyance in question. The ‘No Objection Certificate’ dated 18.08.2015 has been annexed with the complaint petition as Annexure-E. On 21.08.2015 o.p. issued a letter to the complainant informing him that outstanding has been fully repaid with dues. But it is astonishing that o.p. had not returned the original Title Deed in question. Finding no other alternative the complainant issued legal notice dated 16.03.2016 demanding the original Title deed. But it is curious enough that o.p. did not bother to redress the grievance of the complainant. Due to unchallenged testimony  we have nothing to disbelief the document adduced by the complainant. In view of  above we find deficiency in service on the part of the o.p. and as such the complainant is entitled to get relief.

As a result the complaint petition succeeds.

          Hence, ordered

          That the case no.173/2016 is allowed ex-parte as against o.p. with cost.

        The o.p. is directed to hand over the original Title deed of the flat in question to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand) only for causing harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand) only within  45 days from the date of this order i.d., an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

        If o.p. fails to provide the original Deed of Conveyance to the complainant, o.p. is directed to give further compensation of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) only to the  complainant within 40 days from the date of failure for not providing the original Title deed to the complainant.

           Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.