Once a loan is settled, banks must return original mortgaged documents promptly, as withholding them without justification constitutes neglect and may warrant compensation.

Judgment :

S.K. Panigrahi, J.

1. In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has sought for a direction from this Court to the Opposite Parties/Bank authorities for returning his original mortgaged title deeds submitted at the time of availing the loan in question

2. In addition to the above prayer, the Petitioner has also sought for a direction from this Court to the Opposite Parties for paying a sum of Rs.5,000/- per day to him from the date of issuance of the “No Due Certificate” because of the delay in returning the above noted documents.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

3. In order to meet his financial requirement in the year 1986,the Petitioner had obtained a working capital loan of Rs.72,000/- from the Opposite Parties/Bank. At the time of availing the loan the Petitioner as per the requirement had mortgaged original title deeds of his property.

4. After availing the loan since the failed to pay the loan E.M.Is in time, the loan account in question became NPA. Hence, the Opposite Party No.2/Bank initiated a proceeding vide TMS No.297 of 1988 before the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), First Court, Cuttack for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,50,592.25 paise as on 25.10.1987.

5. Upon institution of the aforesaid proceeding vide TMS No.297 of 1988, the Opposite Parties/Bank as per the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India floated an One Time Settlement Scheme for settlement of the loan accounts already declared as NPA.

6. Soon after getting the information regarding the said scheme, the Petitioner submitted an application for settlement of the loan outstanding dues as per the said scheme. Accordingly, the loan outstanding dues of the Petitioner was settled at a sum of Rs.1,06,337/-. A communication in that regard was also made to the Petitioner by the Assistant General Manager of the Opposite Party No.1/Bank vide letter dated 26.07.2010. The Petitioner paid the above noted OTS amount in due time. Upon such payment the Assistant General Manager of the Opposite Party No.1/Bank vide letter dated 24.12.2010 issued “No Due Certificate” in favour of the Petitioner.

7. Upon clearance of the loan outstanding dues and issuance of a “No Due Certificate” in favour of the Petitioner/ the Petitioner approached the concerned authority of the Opposite Parties/Bank for getting the documents i.e. original mortgaged title deeds back which was submitted at the time of availing the loan. Despite several approaches of the Petitioner, the authority concerned of the Opposite Parties/Bank are not returning the above noted documents to the Petitioner. Hence, this Writ Petition.

II. SUBMISSIONS OF PETITIONER

8. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner being a septuagenarian person has been approaching the concerned authorities of the Opposite Parties/Bank for getting the above noted documents back since 2010. He further submits that due to non-return of the above noted valuable documents the Petitioner is suffering immensely.

9. He, accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer made by the Petitioner in this Writ Petition.

III. SUBMISSIONS OF OPPOSITE PARTIES

10. Per contra, learned Counsel for the OppositeParties/Bank intently made the following submissions:

11. Learned counsel for the Opposite Parties/Bank submits that since the loan account of the Petitioner was classified as NPA, the Opposite Parties/Bank initiated a proceeding vide TMS No.297 of 1988 before the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), First Court, Cuttack.Since the matter was subjudice before the learned court below, the Opposite Parties/Bank were not in a position to return the above noted document