State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Secretary, Salem Industrial ... vs P.Angammal, W/O.Palanichamy, ... on 18 August, 2011
THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI
THE TAMILNADU STATE
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI
(BENCH
II)
Present: Thiru.A.K.Annamalai, M.A.,
M.L., M.Phil., Presiding Judicial Member,
Thiru.S.Sambandam, B.Sc., Member.
F.A.No. 61/2009
[Against order in C.C.No.68/2008
on the file of the DCDRF, Salem]
THURSDAY, THE 18th DAY
OF AUGUST 2011.
The
Secretary,
Salem Industrial Employees Co-op.
Housing Construction Society,
No.193/103,
Arisipalayam Main Road,
Upstair,
Salem -9. ..
Appellant/Opposite party
Vs.
P.Angammal,
W/o.Palanichamy,
No.1/28B
Chinnanoor Post,
Chukkampatti
Via, Salem District. .. Respondent/Complainant
The appeal coming before us for
hearing finally on 02.08.2011, upon hearing the arguments of both sides and
perused the documents, written submissions as well as the order of the District
Forum, this Commission made the following order :-
Counsel
for the Appellant/ Opposite party : Ms.J.Ranjani Devi, Advocate.
Counsel
for the Respondent/ Complainant
: Mr.T.Karunakaruan, Advocate.
ORDER
A.K.ANNAMALAI, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. The opposite party is the appellant.
2. Complainant filed a complaint against opposite party claiming for return of the original documents deposited with the opposite party and Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and damages for the loss due to non return of documents and for costs.
3. The complainant applied for a housing loan as a member from the opposite party for Rs.2,00,000/- and for the same deposited the original documents for the purpose of loan and as the opposite party informed on 28.5.01 that only a sum of Rs.1,40,000/- was sanctioned and as the same was not sufficient for the construction of the house she requested for consideration of Rs.2,00,000/- and which was not granted and thereby when she demanded for the return of documents they have evaded the same and the complainant came to know during 2003 on pledging the documents of the complainant on 26.12.2001 a sum of Rs.1,37,134/- was obtained by the society itself by using the society person and by forging the signature of the complainant. In spite of repeated requests of the return of documents the opposite party stated since there is a police case is pending and the documents are submitted to the Criminal Court it will be returned as soon as the case is disposed on and thereby the complainant landed with this complaint.
4. The opposite party denied the allegations of the complainant and admitted that the documents were not returned since there was a fraud committed by the former Secretary with other members created documents and took money as if the concerned applicants obtained loan. Cases are pending before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.3, Salem, in which all the documents were produced and the complainant document is not in the custody of the opposite party which was informed to the complainant in the reply notice and thereby there was no deficiency on the part of the opposite party.
5. On the basis of both sides materials and after an enquiry the District Forum allowed the complaint by directing the opposite party to return the documents immediately and to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs.
6. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the opposite party filed this appeal and contended that the documents are not within the custody and since they are filed with the Criminal case concerned as soon as the same is returned will be handed over to the complainant and the District Forum erroneously allowed the complaint.
7. While considering both sides arguments, averments and contentions it is the admitted case of both sides that the complainant had entrusted the original documents of her property for obtaining loan from the opposite party and as the expected loan was not sanctioned she demanded for return of documents which was not returned by the opposite party by stating that since the fraud was committed by the then Secretary and other members of the society by using the members documents with forged signatures obtained loan as if the applicants have availed the same and thereby criminal cases are pending trial before the Judicial Magistrate No.3, Salem. Hence it is clear and admitted fact that the opposite party have not handed over the original documents to the complainant whatever may be the reason for the same which would amount to deficiency of service due to negligence. Even though the criminal cases are pending for which documents are entrusted to the criminal court if the opposite parties are really interested with the members to the society they could have made alternative arrangements to get back the original documents from the criminal court pending trial by substituting certified copies or by making necessary applications before the court, explaining the circumstances of the ordeal of the customers without having original documents to obtain loan or any other benefits by utilizing the original documents. But in this case the opposite party simply evaded the liability by stating that the documents are entrusted with the criminal court and they are not with their custody. Hence in those circumstances we feel that the order of the District Forum in this regard cannot be assailed as erroneous or wrong. As far as the compensation is concerned the District Forum awarded the sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation and as the complainant has not availed any loan and even though she had the mental agony in this regard, we feel that the quantum of compensation could be reduced to some extent and thereby the quantum of compensation is alone reduced to Rs.15,000/- from Rs.25,000/-.
8. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part, modifying the order of the District Forum, the quantum of compensation is alone reduced to Rs.15,000/- from Rs.25,000/- and in other respects the order of the District Forum is confirmed. However there will be no order as to costs. The opposite party is directed to return the original documents to the complainant by taking necessary steps to get back the original documents from the Criminal Court within 3 months from the date of this order and hand over the same to the complainant.
S.SAMBANDAM A.K.ANNAMALAI, MEMBER PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER INDEX : YES / NO sg/B-II/aka// Housing Socy