S.N.KAPOOR, B.K.TAIMNI
M. Mallika – Appellant
Versus
Managing Director, State Bank of India – Respondent
S.N. Kapoor, Presiding Member — By this order, we proceed to decide above three appeals arising out of similar and common questions of law and facts. The Complainants/Appellants were either partners or guarantors of loans granted to 4 other firms. By these appeals, they are claiming compensation for mental agony and harassment, caused due to non delivery of their title deeds, despite all payments.
2. In all these three appeals, the Appellants were Complainant, before the State Commission and all the three filed three separate complaints seeking similar reliefs of direction against the State; Bank of India to deliver the documents/ title deeds of mortgage properties for the entire amount had been paid in terms of Section 60 (a) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 along with compensation for mental agony of Rs.5,00,001/- in two cases and Rs. 10,00,001/- in one case and cost.
On the other hand, the bank has contested the matter on the ground that these complainants were also partners and guarantors of loans granted to other concern and huge sums were due against them as Guarantors.
3. The bank contested FA No. 664 of 1996, inter alia, on the ground that the complainant -Mrs. M. M
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.