M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

PLOT NO. 76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (M.P.)

FA No. 1078 /2008.

1. Bank of India,

Through Zonal Manager,

Zonal Office, Division Ujjain,

18, Shankhu Marg, Freeganj,

Ujjain (M.P.).

2. Senior Branch Manager,

Bank of India, Freeganj,

Ujjain (M.P.).

….. Appellant

VERSUS

Devendra Kumar

s/o Shri Hukumchand Jain,

R/o 25, Dusshera Maidan,

Ujjain (M.P.).

…. Respondent.

BEFORE:

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, PRESIDENT

HON’BLE SHRI S. S. BANSAL, MEMBER

COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE PARTIES :

Shri Vikas Rai, learned counsel for the appellants.

Shri Dwarkadheesh Choudhary, learned counsel for the respondent.

-

2 -

O R D E R

(Passed on 14 / 10 / 2021)

The following order of the Commission was delivered by Shantanu S.

Kemkar, J :

This appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for

short the “Act of 1986”) has been filed against the order dated 25.2.2008 passed by the

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ujjain (for short the “District

Commission”) in CC No.351/2007 whereby the District Commission while partly allowing

the complaint filed by the respondent directed the appellant / Bank to pay him Rs.68,042/-

towards transfer fees which was required to be paid by the respondent for transferring his

name in the records of Ujjain Development Authority (for short “UDA”) in the property

purchased by him in public auction carried by the appellant and also directed to the

appellant to pay Rs.5000/- to respondent towards correction required to be done in the

lease deed. In addition, Rs.1000/- has been awarded to the respondent to be payable by

the appellant towards costs.

2.

Brief facts, necessary for disposal of this appeal are that in pursuance to

the auction notice issued by the appellant / Bank for sale of the land mortgaged with it by

one Lalit Jain, the respondent submitted his bid. The respondent being successful bidder

for the said land admeasuring 262 sq. mtr. of survey No.A-1 / 1 situated at Vednagar MIG,

Nanakheda, Ujjain, it was

-

3 -

sold by the appellant to the respondent after receiving the amount of Rs.32,11,111/-

towards the price as quoted by him. A sale certificate to that effect was issued by the

appellant in favour of the respondent and sale deed was also executed in his favour.

However as there was some mistake on the part of the appellant in regard to the

description of the land an amended sale deed was executed for which Rs.5000/- was also

required to be paid by the respondent.

3.

On the basis of the aforesaid sale certificate and the sale deed the

respondent approached to the UDA for transfer of lease deed in his name. However as

there were dues of the previous owner viz. Lalit Jain Rs.3,49,863/- were got deposited by

the UDA from the respondent for getting the lease deed transferred in his name. Feeling

dissatisfied with the action of the appellant requiring him to deposit the aforesaid amount

because of negligence of appellant in not properly making search before the property was

transferred in the name of Lalit Jain from its earlier owner and not getting the balance

amount deposited by Lalit Jain while advancing loan in his favour thereby causing

monetary loss to him, the respondent filed complaint before the District Commission

alleging deficiency in service and claimed compensation of Rs.3,84,863/- from the

appellant.

4.

The District Commission by the impugned order partly allowed the

complaint and held that out of the amount of Rs.3,49,863/- deposited by the respondent,

the amount of Rs.68,042/- and Rs.5000/- is payable by the

-

4 -

appellant / Bank and as such directed the appellant / Bank to pay to the respondent /

complainant in all Rs.73,042/- with Rs.1000/- towards costs. Feeling aggrieved the

appellant has filed this appeal.

5.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6.

Learned counsel for the app

Click Here to Read the rest of this document