JUDGMENT

PER : HON’BLE MS. PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

1. By this judgment, we shall dispose of the appeal filed by the Appellant against the impugned order dated 03.11.2018, passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Central), ISBT Kashmere Gate, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as District Forum), in Complaint Case no. CC-300/2014 titled as Smt. Bindu Roy vs. LIC Housing Finance Ltd. inter-alia praying for setting aside the order passed by the District Forum.

2. While the Appellant was Opposite Party before the District Forum and the Respondent was Complainant before the District Forum.

3. The facts of the case as per the District Forum, record are as under:

“Instant complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s sec 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 pleading therein that complainant applied for house loan of Rs. 1 Lac vide application no. 1111544 dated 09/12/1994 for the purchase of the House No. 22/A IInd Floor, Kalusarai, New Delhi to the OP who handed over a cheque of Rs. 1 Lac as loan amount before the Registering authority to the complainant on 06/04/1995 at the time of registering the sale deed of the house property as collateral security/ Mortgage. OP issued a certificate that it had retained the original title deed towards mortgage of the house. Complainant sought further loan of Rs. 2 Lac from OP for renovation of the new purchased flat. It was sanctioned by the OP. Complainant has paid entire loan amount to the OP and OP has issued a full and final payment receipts No. 0002141 dated 06/08/2010. On 21/10/2010 complainant requested OP to return original documents followed by reminder letters dated 12/05/2011, 19/09/2013 and 26/04/2013 but OP has not returned the original documents. Hence, the instant complaint seeking direction to OP to return the original registered sale deed, Rs. 15,00,000/- as damages for not returning the original sale deed, Rs. 500000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and deficiency in service.”

4. The District Forum after taking into consideration the material available on record passed the judgment dated 03.11.2018, whereby it held as follows:

“5. It was contented on behalf of the OP that the complaint is barred by limitation. Complainant’s case is that on payment of entire loan amount by her to the OP and on issuance of full and final payment receipts No. 0002141 dated 06/08/2010 by the OP she requested OP on 21/10/2010 to return her original documents which was not done. She reiterated her request vide letters dated 12/05/2011, 19/09/2013 and 26/04/2014 but the OP did not return her title deeds.

6. OP has been playing hide and seek with the complainant. Even before this Forum it has taken a conflicting stand. In para 03 of the complaint complainant has clearly pleaded that OP had issued a certificate to her that it had retained original sale deed with it as collateral security/mortgage copy of the certificate was placed on record as Annexure A-2. In corresponding para 3 of its reply OP has not denied that it did not issue the said certificate although it has vaguely and ambiguously pleaded that complainant submitted some original documents. It is also pleaded that complainant was reminded repeatedly that she had to submit original sale deed after registration of the property but she did not do so. OP has not proved that it ever wrote to the complainant that original sale deed was not deposited by her with the bank and that she was required to deposit sale deed after registration.

7. OP vide its certificate bearing no. LICHFL/95/5/01-101-9008 dated 31/01/96 copy whereof was placed on record as Annexure A – 2 clearly acknowledged that :

‘’This is to certify that Smt. Bindu Roy and Sh. Himanshu Prasad Roy have taken a loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- from us.The property (House No. 22 MCD 22A, IInd Floor, Kalu Sarai, New Delhi) is mortgaged with us.All the original documents of the property are mortgaged with us against the above mentioned loan A/C.’’

I