F I N A L O R D E R

By Sri. Ram Mohan R, Member :

1) Complaint in brief, as averred :

The complaint is filed under Section 35(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The 1st complainant is the mother of the 2nd complainant. The complainants statedly hold a savings account with the 1st opposite party bank. The 2nd opposite party is the Manager of the 1st opposite party bank. The complainants availed an agricultural loan of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs only) from the 1st opposite party bank in the year 2014 with loan Account No. CKCC3332382945, after depositing with the bank documents including original Pattayam No.A3-311/11 in favour of the 1st complainant in respect of a landed property having an extent of 0.8903 hectare (2 acre 20 cents) in Survey No.1416/P Madakkathara Village. The complainants state that they were lured by the various promises made by the 2nd opposite party - Manager of the bank and hence availed the said loan. Subsequently, on 26/04/2018 when the 2nd complainant approached the opposite parties for an additional loan of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only), they had informed him that the Pattayam document was missing. The complainants were shocked to hear loss of the property document. The 2nd opposite party on 02/02/23 issued a declaration stating the loss of the Pattayam document. The complainants aver that owing to the loss of the documents the 1st complainant is not in a position to sell her property, or to raise fund from any financial institution by pledging the same. The event of irrecoverable loss of the pattayam document from the bank is alleged to have caused severe mental and physical agony to the complainants and also inflicted economic loss on them. A lawyer notice caused by the 1st complainant statedly elicited no result. The complainant alleges deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and claims for a total compensation worth Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty lakhs only) for the agony, hardship and financial loss inflicted on them.

2) NOTICE :

The Commission issued notice to both the opposite parties. The opposite parties failed to file the written version in time, despite their having received the Commission’s notice to that effect. Hence the Commission was constrained to proceed ex-parte against both the opposite parties.

3) Evidence :

The complainant produced documental evidence that had been marked Exts. A1 to A11, apart from affidavit and notes of arguments. The 2nd complainant underwent cross examination by the opposite parties. Proceedings against the opposite parties being ex-parte, no evidence adduced on their part.

4) Deliberation of evidence and facts of the case :

The Commission has very carefully examined the facts and evidence of the case. Ext. A1 is copy of the 2nd complainant’s letter dtd. 14/05/2018. Ext. A2 is copy of the 1st complainant’s letter dtd. 15/11/2019 addressed to the 2nd opposite party. Ext. A3 is copy of the 1st complainant’s letter dtd. 06/09/21 addressed to the 2nd opposite party. Ext. A4 is photocopy of Patta in Form No.6 bearing No.A3-311/11 in favour of the 1st complainant in respect of 0.8903 hectare land in Survey No.1416/P in Madakkathara Village. Ext. A4 bears an endorsement of the 1st opposite party regarding deposit of original pattayam with them. Ext. A5 is attested copy of an extract of bank passbook. Ext. A6 is copy of lawyer notice. Ext. A7 is copy of receipt of complaint issued by Viyyoor Police Station along with copy of complaint. Ext. A8 is the 2nd opposite party’s letter dtd. 02/02/23 addressed to the 1st complainant. Ext. A9 is copy of FIR No.0992 dtd. 19/11/23. Ext. A10 is copy of the 2nd opposite party’s letter dtd. 03/03/2014 addressed to Adv. Surendranath P.A., Ayyanthole, Thrissur. Ext. A11 is a bank-issued copy of “Process Note For Renewal of CKCC” dtd. 30/03/2021 in respect of the complainants’ loan account No.3332382945. A pen drive produced by the complainant was seen marked MO1 (SP).

5) Points of deliberation :