/respondent deposited Rs.5 Lac in two installments of Rs.2 Lac on 27.10.1997 and Rs.3 Lac on 21.09.2001. The amount was to carry interest @ 18% p.a. Appellants/opposite parties paid interest on the sum of Rs.2 Lac upto 31.03.2001 after deducting TDS. Appellants did not pay the interest on the sum of Rs.2 Lac thereafter. No interest was paid on the deposit of Rs.3 Lac. On demand by the respondent, appellants neither returned the amount nor paid any interest. Being aggrieved, respondent filed the complaint before the State Commission seeking a direction to the appellants to refund the sum of Rs.5 Lac, i.e., the principal amount along with interest of Rs.94,258/-. Compensation and costs were also demanded. Appellants in spite of being duly served did not file Written Statement. -3- Since the facts stated in the complaint and the affidavit in evidence led by the respondent remained uncontroverted and unrebutted, the State Commission taking the facts stated in the complaint to be correct, allowed the complaint and directed the appellant to pay sum of Rs.5,94,258/- to the respondent along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till realization. Rs.3,000/- were awarded by way of compensation and Rs.1500/- as costs. State Commission has observed as under: “So far as the facts of this case are concerned, the complainant’s say on oath affirming the fact of complaint has remained unrebutted. Otherwise also it is proved by the documents produced with list filed along with the complaint. At the time of arguments the receipt of the amount is admitted but the say of the opponents is that the same has been received against the allotment of flats. The opponents have not produced any booking letter or allotment letter in favour of the complainant. The opponents have relied on the papers of Summary Civil Suit No.1608 of 2002 filed with list 21.09.2010. The complainant is not party to this suit. Moreover the subject matter of the suit is entirely different. Refusal of payment of the deposit along with the interest at the agreed rate clearly tentamounts to a deficiency in service on the part of the opponents.” -4- We agree with the view taken by the State Commission. Averments made in the complaint duly supported by affidavit in evidence remained uncontroverted and unrebutted. Facts unrebutted and uncontroverted can be taken as proved. Under the circumstances, the State Commission taking the facts stated in the complaint to be correct has rightly allowed the complaint and directed the appellants to pay the deposited amount of Rs.5 Lac along with interest already accrued on it. We find no infirmity in the order passed by the State Commission. Dismissed. | 
