The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kanchipuram District @ Chengalpattu, comprising President Thiru. U. Kasipandian and Member-I Thiru. M. Jawahar, has held the State Bank of India (SBI) liable for deficiency in service for losing the complainants' original property title documents after repayment of a home loan. The Commission observed that the bank failed to comply with the Reserve Bank of India's directions governing the release of original property documents and failed to adequately assist the complainants in obtaining certified copies after the documents were misplaced.

Brief Facts

The complainants, Mr. Somasekhar Gangarapu and Mrs. Sai Sireesha Nidiginti, availed a home loan of ₹46.35 lakh from the State Bank of India in 2012 and deposited the original title documents of their residential property as security. After repaying the loan on 16-04-2024, they sought the return of the original documents, but the bank informed them that the documents had been misplaced and could not be traced.

The complainants alleged that the bank's failure to return the original title deeds amounted to deficiency in service under Section 2(11) and an unfair trade practice under Section 2(47) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Relying on the RBI Circular dated 13-09-2023, they contended that the bank was obligated to return the documents or compensate them for the loss. The complaint was filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Despite repeated follow-ups, emails and a legal notice, the bank failed to recover the documents, although it admitted that they had been misplaced. The complainants claimed that a prospective buyer backed out due to the absence of the original title deeds, causing them financial loss and mental agony. After their complaint before the RBI Ombudsman was closed on jurisdictional grounds, they approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kanchipuram District @ Chengalpattu, seeking return of the original documents or compensation, along with damages for the loss and litigation expenses.

Contentions of the Opposite Party

The bank contested the complaint, admitting that the original documents had been misplaced while in its custody but contending that it had taken remedial measures by providing certified copies and initiating other necessary steps in accordance with the RBI guidelines.

Observations and decision

The Commission observed that the bank had admittedly misplaced the complainants' original title documents despite full repayment of the home loan. It held that the bank failed to comply with the RBI Circular dated 13-09-2023 by neither returning the documents within the prescribed period nor adequately assisting the complainants in obtaining certified copies. The Commission held that the bank's conduct amounted to deficiency in service and warranted action under Section 39(1)(k) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Accordingly, the Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed SBI to trace and return the original title documents or, alternatively, pay the present market value of the property and take over the same. It further directed the bank to pay compensation of ₹5,000 per day from 16 June 2024 till realization in terms of the RBI Circular dated 13 September 2023, interest at 18% per annum on ₹46.35 lakh from 16 April 2024 till realization, ₹25,000 towards litigation costs, and ₹50 lakh to the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Welfare Fund.

Case Title: Somasekhar Gangarapu & Anr. v. State Bank of India

Case No.: C.C. No. 03 of 2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order