ICICI penalised to pay Rs. 1 Lakh for losing customer’s original sale deed
February 14, 2020The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) directed ICICI Bank to pay a compensation of Rs. 1 lakh, to a customer for losing the original sale deed of his property which was deposited with the bank against the loan advanced to the customer by the bank.
The apex consumer forum, NCDRC, also imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on the bank as a “stern advice of caution”.
Rajesh Khandelwal and his wife, a couple residing in Alwar, had taken a loan of Rs. 17.5 lakh from ICICI Bank and had deposited the original sale deed of their flat with the bank against the loan, which the bank lost later.
The commission has ordered to pay Rs. 50,000 to the couple and the balance amount with the Consumer Legal Aid Account of the district forum out of the total cost of Rs. 1 lakh imposed on the bank.
While upholding the order of the Alwar District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, the Commission observed that the original sale deed of any property is a document of utmost importance and losing it can have a conflicting impact on the property.
The NCDRC while rejecting the revision petition of the bank, also suggested the bank to conduct an inquiry to fix responsibility for loss of the document. The Commission also noted that the bank should have apologised to the couple for losing the original sale-deed of their property and should have ‘reconstructed’ the document and given the same back to the Khandelwals.
While supporting the order, the NCDRC presiding member Dinesh Singh stated that “It may be noted that an original registered sale-deed is an important document, its loss adversely affects the property. Even if the document is reconstructed, a question still obtains on the property, and continues in perpetuity”.
The district consumer commission had last year ordered the bank to pay a compensation of Rs. 1 lakh to the couple against which the bank had moved the State Commission by filing a revision petition, which was rejected and the order of the district forum was upheld by the Commission. Subsequently, the bank had moved to the NCDRC against the state commission’s order.