In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.  4 / 2010.

1)                   Sri Bhola Nath Samaddar,

1/4, Ratan Babu Road, Kolkata-700002.                                                  ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   Axix Bank Limited,

7/1, Lord Sinha Road, Kolkata-700071.                                                   ---------- Opposite Party

Present :           Smt. Jhumki Saha, Member-in-Charge.

                        Dr. A. B. Chakraborty, Member.

Order No.   23    Dated  30/12/2011.

It is the specific case of the complaint that even after arriving at a settlement before ld. District Legal Aid Service, Kolkata on 13.9.08 o.p. bank has demanded extra money from complainant vide their demand letter dt.31.10.09 annex-Pg 18.

            Both parties arrived at a settlement that complainant would pay Rs.1,16,675/- to o.p. in the following manner as per the instruction of ld. District Legal Aid Service Authority, Kolkata vide annex-Pg 10, wherefrom it is clear that complainant was directed to pay Rs.4000/- in the first month being Sept. 2009 and rest of the amount of Rs.1,16,675/- i.e. (Rs.1,16,675 – Rs.4000) = Rs.1,12,675/- in nine equal instalments being Rs.12,520/- (approx) from Oct. 2008. That being the position, complainant paid only Rs.84,000/- upto 25.3.09 although by 28.6.09. Complainant was required to pay off the entire amount of Rs.1,12,675/-. And on 31.10.09 o.p. demanded Rs.1,24,749/- to be paid within two months or they would initiate legal action .

            On perusal of he annex-10, we find ld. District Legal Services Authority, Kolkata also in its order dt.13.8.09 stated tht in default of the compliance by the complainant Shri Bholanath Samaddar, the o.p. bank may take steps against complainant for realization of the amount according to law.

            We know that amicable settlement is something that are being entered into by both parties on their will. None of the parties can deviate from the terms of the settlement. Once the term is violated by either of the parties, the settlement becomes null and void.

            In  view of the above discussion, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the o.p. bank against whom complainant filed this instant petition on 7.1.10 and o.p. also appeared and filed w/v, evidence and BNA.

            In conducting this instant case, too, we find complainant was not diligent at all as at least twice complainant was directed to show cause as to why the case shall not be dismissed for default. Complainant even did not comply with order no.14 dt.3.1.11 when he was directed to pay cost of Rs.500/- to be deposited to the Consumer Welfare Fund. Even after giving undertaking to comply with the same, complainant did not care to deposit the same even on the final day of hearing of argument. This very conduct of the complainant shows sheer negligence on his part. Accordingly the petition of complainant filed u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 on 7.1.10 stands dismissed with a direction upon the complainant to deposit the sum of Rs.500/- to Consumer Welfare Fund within 30 days from the date of communication of this order i.d. process will be issued from this Forum against him.

   ___Sd____                                                 ________Sd________________

     MEMBER                                                    MEMBER-IN-CHARGE