Back
KALYANI S. KAPSE, SHAILA D. WANDHARE
State Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Narayanrao Nakhle – Respondent
ORDER
Shaila D. Wandhare, Member.—This is an appeal preferred by the original opposite party, State Bank of India through its Chief Manager, being aggrieved by the order passed on 04/01/2017 of the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Yavatmal (for short as “learned District Forum”) in Consumer Complaint No.34/2015, vide Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
2. The facts emerge from the present appeal is that the original complainant/respondent had availed the housing loan of Rs.1,50,000/- from appellant against the plot No.15 of Dahiwalkar Plot Yavatmal and mortgaged the said property depositing original sale deed of said property and had repaid said loan fully. The original complainant/respondent had also entered into agreement to sell of area 300 sq.ft. out of plot no.15 of Dahiwalkar Layout Yavatmal for a consideration of Rs.12,00,000/- at the rate of Rs.4,000/- per sq.ft. and received earnest amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. The original complainant/respondent could not perform his part of contract due to non-return of original sale documents of property from appellant instead request for time and again. Therefore, original complainant/respondent has returned
Consumer Dispute – By no stretch of imagination, the receipt of amount more than Rs.20,000/- without cheque is not relevant issue for adjudication of the consumer disputes between the respondent and ....
Bungalow Buyer’s Agreement – Direction for refund can be passed where agreement between parties has become difficult to be honoured.
Home Loan – Reduction in sale consideration, though indicative of financial prejudice, cannot be wholly attributed to loss of Title Documents or quantified solely on the basis of sale documents.
Legal Title - The legal title of the complainant does stand compromised on account of the loss of the original documents by opposite party 1.
Non-execution of the Sale Deed by Respondent in favour of the appellant sufficiently indicates that total amt. of consideration was not received by the Respondent.
Loss of Sale Deed - There is no doubt that the Petitioner Bank was responsible for the loss of the Sale Deed. The Petitioner being entrusted with the document relating to the Property of the Responde....
The court affirmed that ownership transfer must occur before financial obligations arise, and established consumer rights based on livelihood motivations in property transactions.
Deficiencies in service by both Builder and Bank resulted in liability for compensation due to mental anguish and harassment caused to the Complainants.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
