VENKAT TUBE INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a complaint under Sec.17 read with Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

(2.) The complainant approached the opposite party for loan to the tune of Rs.8.18 lakhs. But the opposite party sanctioned the loan in November 1988 in the sum of Rs.4 lakhs consisting of cash credit to the tune of Rs.2.5 lakhs and bill discounting Rs.1.5 lakhs. In September 1990 the complainant applied to the opposite party for increasing the working capital limited to Rs.7 lakhs and at the request of the opposite party he handed over the documents in respect of his Flat at Annanagar bearing Door No.200/18, Asiad Colony. The opposite party did not sanction additional loan and was dragging on the matter. When the complainant wrote to the opposite party to return the original document in respect of the residential Flat aforesaid, the opposite party claimed that this property was also offered as collatoral security for the original loan. This is disputed by the complainant who has filed this complaint for directing the opposite party to return the title deed for the Residential Flat No.200/18, Asiad Colony and for damages in the sum of Rs.50,000/-.

(3.) The claim is resisted by the opposite party. According to the opposite party even for the original loan sanctioned, this residential fiat was offered as collatoral security and the deed would prove the same. At that time the Housing Board had not executed the Deed of Sale in favour of the complainant, because the entire sale consideration have not been paid to the Housing Board. The Housing Board requested the complainant to deposit a sum of Rs.10,737/- towards the balance of the cost and at the request of the complainant, the opposite party bank issued the Demand Draft and only thereafter the Sale Deed was executed. The complainant applied for additional working capital to the tune of Rs.7 lakhs but it was not sanctioned. The title deed in respect of the Residential Flat was not returned as this property had been offered as collatoral security for the original loan. The complainant has not repaid the loan amounts and the bank has been filed a suit in O. S. No.28/93 on the file of the Subordinate Judge on the equitable mortgage of property which includes this residential flat. The total amount due is comes to Rs.6,42,483.55. There is therefore no deficiency of service.