RUPAM COLOUR LAB PVT LTD Vs. ICICI BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these complaints are disposed of by this common order since they involve identical facts and common question of law.

(2.) COMPLAINANTS in each case are sister concerns. They are in the form of either Limited companies, partnership firm or proprietary concern. It is the contention of Mr.Kirtikumar Mehta that he, his family and extended family members are running a Photography Laboratory business under different names and style i.e.complainants. It is further contended on their behalf that for the business they have raised various loan and loan facilities were taken from opponent/ICICI Bank (herein after referred as 'Bank' for brevity) during the period 30/10/2004 to 11/06/2007. They have created equitable mortgage/English mortgage or mortgage by depositing Title deeds to raise the various loans. Loans were fully repaid. Somewhere on or before 15/04/2010 the bank also issued letters accordingly. However, the bank failed to return the original title documents pledged with them or given by way of security as a mortgage. Therefore, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the bank, these consumer complaints are filed. By way of relief, in short, the complainants claimed direction against the Bank to return the original title deeds and to pay compensation to the extent of Rs. 1 crore.

(3.) THE bank opposed these consumer complaints submitting that there is no deficiency in service on their part, though admits loss of documents, which according to the bank is an unfortunate event but further submitted that they are willing to co -operate with the complainants to obtain the certified copies of those documents at their costs. However, since the complainants were not co -operating, the copies of the documents so far could not be obtained. It is also submitted on their behalf that they are willing to give necessary Indemnity Bond/Declarations, etc.