NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK Vs. K.VIJAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are the opposite parties /North Malabar Gramin Bank that are under orders to pay a sum of Rs. 2,500 as compensation for deficiency in service to the complainant and also to pay Rs. 250 as costs vide order in OP No. 394/96 in the file of CDRF, Kannur.

(2.) IT is the case of the complainant that he had applied for loan from the opposite parties for starting a flour mill under self employment scheme for purchasing machineries and working capital. He had submitted title deeds of himself and that of one Sajeevan as collateral security for creating equitable mortgage. As directed by the opposite parties their legal adviser Advocate P.K. Ramesh did the scrutiny for which the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 500. The complainant was also compelled to pay the amount due to the agricultural loan of M.V. Narayanan Nambiar amounting to Rs. 5,700 for which the complainant was a guarantor. Subsequently the Branch Manager of the opposite party asked for a non -liability affidavit from the assignor of the property of the complainant and also a certificate from the revenue authorities mentioning that no Patta was issued to the property of Sajeevan. The above documents were not produced. The above documents are not required in view of the opinion of the legal adviser. It is his contention that he would have approached some other financial institution for the above loan. He was sought for a sum of Rs. 25,000 as compensation.

(3.) ON the other hand, the opposite parties/appellants have contended that the loan application was rejected as the required documents were not produced. It is admitted that the legal adviser had advised for accepting the title deed of one cent of property in the name of the complainant and 46 cents in the name of Sajeevan provided that the complainant produces a notary attested non -liability affidavit from the predecessor of the complainant and a certificate from the revenue department stating that no Patta was issued to Sajeevan. The above was sought as the complainant has not produced the original partition deed of his predecessor. The property purchased by Sajeevan is a property surrendered as excess land to the Government. The said land was originally assigned to one Keloth Omana. As per Land Assignment Rules, Government can assign lands obtained as excess land only to landless agricultural labourers by issuing Patta. As Sajeevan has not produced Patta along with the assignment deed the complainant was directed to produce a certificate from the revenue authorities stating that no Patta has been issued to Sajeevan. It is further pointed out the bank is not bound as such even by the opinion of the legal adviser and that it has discretion to consider the sufficiency of the security.