PER MR.JUSTIC A.P.BHANGALE, HON’BLE PRESIDENT

(Common Judgment)

1)     By both these appeals validity and legality of the impugned award passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Wardha is under challeng.

2)    We have heard submissions at the bar as also perused impugned judgment and award. There is no dispute that sum of Rs.40,000/- was invested for terms of two years, vide receipt No 21/319 on 01/12/1988 @ 10% p.a. interest. Upon maturity of the said fixed deposit, it was again reinvested vide receipt No.23/456. Thus sum of Rs.48,736/- came to be reinvested payable on maturity with interest @ 10% p.a. upon maturity . The maturity amount again reinvested in fixed deposit vied receipt No. 26/107 for term of one year @ 12% p.a. Thus sum of Rs. 66,742/- became due as on 1/12/1993. We are also informed that there was a Civil Court litigation between the parties being Special Civil Suit No.31/1995 instituted by Central Bank of India through its Wardha branch on 06/02/1995 and it was decided on 03/04/1999 where by the issue as to whether Central Bank through the complainant agreed to lien on the deposit of Rs.40,000/- invested on 01/12/1988 was answered in the negative. There was civil appeal by the Central Bank against the judgment and order passed by the trial Court in the appeal, there was point No. 2 framed by appellate Court as to whether trial Court erred in dismissing the claim of the bank against the complainant. The appeals were dismissed and hence there is no further litigation in Civil Court. The decree became final. It is under these circumstances, the complainants are claiming loss of interest in the sum of Rs.9,50,000/- from the bank together with compensation sum of Rs.2,00,000/- toward mental and physical harassment. The loss of interest is claimed on account of the version of the complainant that complainant had transaction with other bank to obtain loan at higher rate of interest.

3.    The grievance of the complainant is that the award made by the learned District Forum is regarding the loan in terms of rate of interest awarded, as also compensation payable for mental and physical harassment.

4.    In our view, considering that the parties were at litigation right from 06/02/1995 till the case attained finality on 13/01/2009. It can not be said that the parties intended to harass each other by fighting the bonafide litigation. It is true that trial Court and appellate Court deciding the issue regarding the lien against the Central Bank of India. However, when Central Bank if ready and willing to pay the rate of interest due and agreed in respect of fixed deposits initially invested on 01/12/1988 till the renewed deposits were matured on 01/12/1990. The total sums due under fixed deposit receipt No.26/107 renewed in the year 1993 for one year and fixed deposit term expiry on 01/12/1993. The rate of interest agreed by the Central Bank on the outstanding dues payable to the complainant was 12% p.a. This amount with interest payable at the rate of interest of 12% p.a. with effect from 01/12/1993 till realization of the amount this would be in the interest of justice, so as to solve the consumer dispute. The learned advocate for the Central Bank stated that entire award amount as granted by the learned District Forum below is deposited (Rs.2,73,377/-) with the State Commission, that amount was not withdrawn by the complainant.

5.     We dispose of these appeals with direction to Central Bank of India through Wardha branch shall pay sum of Rs.66,742/- together with interest @ 12% p.a. with effect from 01/12/1993 till realization. However, complainant shall appropriate the amount withdrawn (deposited if any by Central Bank of India) toward the outstanding dues. Since compensation was granted in the normal and reasonable sum of Rs.2000/- toward mental and physical harassment and litigation cost of sum of Rs.1500/-, we are not inclined to disturb the same. The learned District Forum below has already directed that the interest is payable on the award amount @ 12 % p.a. if unpaid, within 30 days, that direction is also maintained. Our attention invited to interim order passed during the pendancy of the appeal No.22/11 that execution was stayed by conditional order and since the appellant had deposited the awarded amount with interest, the execution was stayed by order dated 12/03/2012.

6.      While disposing of appeals, we have already issued directions to the Central Bank of India, Wardha branch that it is liable to pay sum of Rs.66,740/- together with interest @ 12% p.a. with effect from 01/12/1993. We further direct that since the execution was stayed by interim order of the State Commission during the period from 12/03/2012 till to-day and since the award amount was already deposited, the liability of payment of interest shall be excluded for the period between 12/03/2012 till to-day, as the stay was operative excluding this period between 12/03/1012 till 15/11/2017. The liability to pay interest is decided accordingly. Entire outstanding dues shall be paid within 30 days from the date of this decision. The complainants are at liberty to apply for withdrawal of the amount deposited by Central Bank of India with the State Commission and if withdrawn, the same shall be allowed to be appropriate towards the total outstanding dues as directed. The liability to pay interest @ 12% p.a. by Central Bank of India to the complainant shall continue from the date of decision of this appeal. In the event to any default on the part of Central Bank of India to pay the outstanding dues together with interest accordingly. Litigation cost in the sum of Rs.5000/- of this appeal, shall also be paid by Central Bank of India to the complainant.