A-468/2015

14-07-2022

:ORDER:

BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER.

            Appellant is not present since from long time. No arguments submitted in spite of sufficient opportunity. Learned advocate for respondent submitted that the order passed by the District Commission is in accordance with the provision of Consumer Protection Act and has rightly directed appellant/Opposite Party to pay matured amount to the complainant whereas they have filed this appeal in order to avoid payment without reasons. Hence, prays for dismissal of appeal.

            On perusal of the appeal, we noticed here  that the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.1,500-00  on 9-11-2006 and maturity value of Rs.3,000-00 as on 10-5-2013 but the Opposite Parties have not paid the matured amount to the complainant without any valid reasons. The only dispute raised by the Opposite Parties is that wife of the complainant was pigmy collector and had recommended the customers to lend loan, in turn the said loan not recovered. Hence withhold the payment of matured amount of the complainant. The stands taken by the appellant for withholding the FD matured amount is not justifiable. It is clear case of deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties in withholding the matured amount payable to the complainant. The District Commission has rightly directed the Opposite Parties to pay matured amount along with interest. Hence, we hold that there is no irregularity in the order passed by the District Commission. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned District Commission to pay the same to the complainant.

            Forward copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Commission.

Lady Member.                                               Judicial Member