JUSTICE V.K.JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL)This revision petition is directed against the order of the State Commission dated 30.03.2005 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of the District Forum was dismissed. The complainant/respondent made a deposit of Rs.50,000/- with a Post Office on 21.09.1996. The said deposit was in contravention of Post Office Savings Bank General Rules which did not permit other institutional investments in Post Office Time Deposit Accounts. The deposit therefore, was in contravention of the rules. Having detected between 18.08.1997 to 22.08.1997, that this aforesaid deposit was in contravention of the rules, the petitioner sent a letter dated 24.12.1997 to the complainant asking it to close the account as the deposit was in contravention of the rules. Subsequently, the petitioner agreed to pay a special interest @ 3% per annum to the complainant on the aforesaid deposit. The case of the petitioner is that the complainant did not respond to the aforesaid offer. The complainant rather approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint. 2. The complaint was resisted by the petitioner primarily on the ground that the deposit was in contravention of the rules and therefore, the agreed interest could not have been paid to the complainant. 3. The District Forum having ruled in favour of the complainant, the petitioner approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. The said appeal having been dismissed, the petitioner is before this Commission by way of this revision petition. 4. Vide notification dated 08.03.1995, Post Office Time Deposit Rules, 1981 were amended whereby such deposits were prohibited. Therefore, the deposit made by the complainant was clearly in contravention of the rules. In fact, the issue relating to payment of interest on such deposit is no more res-integra in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 13.07.2011. In Civil Appeal No. 4995 of 2006 Arulmighu Dhandayudhapaniswamy Vs. The Director General of Post Offices, Department of Posts & Ors. 5. In view of the aforesaid decision, the agreed interest could not have been paid to the complainant. However, the rules also mandated the Post Office to refund the principal amount to the depositor without interest, as soon as such deposits were detected. This is the case of the petitioner itself that the contravention of the rules was detected by it between 18.08.1997 to 22.08.1997. The principal amount of Rs.50,000/- therefore, ought to have been refunded to the complainant immediately thereafter. Not refunding even the principal amount immediately after detecting the contravention amounts to deficiency in rendering services to the depositor and therefore, appropriate compensation for the said deficiency would be payable by the petitioner to the complainant. 6. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the revision petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) From the date of deposit till 31.08.1997, the petitioner shall pay special interest @ 3% per annum which it had already offered to the complainant. (ii) With effect from 01.09.1997, till the date of refund of the principal amount, the petitioner shall pay compensation in the form of simple interest @ 12% per annum to the complainant. (iii) The payment shall be made within two months from today. | 
