Documents Destroyed Due To Fire In Storage Area, Kolkata District Commission Holds IDBI Bank Liable
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – II (West Bengal) bench comprising Sukla Sengupta (President) and Reyazuddin Khan (Member) held IDBI Bank liable of deficiency in services for its failure to take utmost care of security and safety of the original documents stored in its storage facility which resulted in destruction of the original documents in a...
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – II (West Bengal) bench comprising Sukla Sengupta (President) and Reyazuddin Khan (Member) held IDBI Bank liable of deficiency in services for its failure to take utmost care of security and safety of the original documents stored in its storage facility which resulted in destruction of the original documents in a fire incident.
Brief Facts:
Mr. Ananda Kr. Jaiswal (“Complainant”) purchased a property through a Deed of Sale from one Sukumar Dutta. The Complainant applied for a bank loan from IDBI Bank (“Bank”), Kolkata Branch, and received a mortgage for the year 2008. He repaid the outstanding loan amount of Rs. 9,15,000/-, which was confirmed by the bank, who issued a No Due Certificate and assured that it will return the original documents. However, the bank, through a letter, claimed that an unfortunate fire incident at the storage premises destroyed all documents, making it impossible to hand them over to the Complainant. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – II, West Bengal (“District Commission) and filed a consumer complaint against the bank.
In response, the bank denied all material allegations, asserting that the complaint was not maintainable due to mis-joinder or non-joinder of necessary parties. It argued that the District Commission lacked jurisdiction and the Complainant had no cause of action. While admitting the housing loan was repaid, it claimed that the Stock Holding Management Service Ltd., Mumbai, where they stored documents, suffered a fire incident on December 11, 2017. It argued that it took utmost care for document safety and was not responsible for the incident.
Observations by the District Commission:
The District Commission noted that the Complainant entrusted the original deeds and documents of the property to the safe custody of the bank with the belief that it would be kept securely. It held that the bank has the duty to exercise utmost care for the safety and security of the deeds and documents entrusted to them by borrowers. It acknowledged that certain incidents may be unavoidable, however, it held the bank liable of deficiency in services.
Consequently, the District Commission imposed a cost of Rs. 1,000/- on the bank. The bank was directed to hand over the original deeds and other documents specified in schedule II of the petition of complaint to the Complainant within 45 days. Failure to comply would result in the bank paying Rs 1,00,000/- to the Complainant. Additionally, the bank was directed to pay compensation of Rs 50,000/- for deficiency in service, harassment, mental pain, and agony, along with litigation costs of Rs 10,000/- incurred by the Complainant.