Delay of 81 days in filing the revision petition is condoned.

          Petitioner was the opposite party before the District Forum.

          Respondent/complainant deposited Rs.1,09,000/- and Rs.54,600/- with the petitioner on 26.6.2007 and 27.6.2007 respectively.  Maturity dates of the deposits were 25.6.2008 and

26.6.2008.  In spite of expiry of the maturity dates of the deposits, petitioner failed to return the maturity amounts.

          Respondent being aggrieved filed a complaint before the District Forum.  District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to pay the maturity value of the two deposits along with interest @ 10% p.a., Rs. 5000/- towards mental agony and Rs.2000/- as costs.

          Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by District Forum, petitioner filed an appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed by the impugned order.

            Petitioner had withheld the amounts on the ground that the respondent while as a member of Management Committee, had taken ‘Commission’ from the depositors.  The State Commission has held that the recovery thereunder is a separate than the payment of the maturity value of the term deposits made by the respondent.  We agree with the view taken by the State Commission.  Whether the allegation regarding taking of ‘Commission’ by the respondent is true or not, shall be confirmed only in enquiry.  If that is found to be correct, only then the recovery can/would be made.  Petitioner cannot withhold the payment of FDR arbitrarily.   There is no infirmity in the order passed by the State Commission.  Dismissed.  No costs.