This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite party to pay `22,087 towards compensation including `12,087 which is being the difference in interest including cost of this litigation.

The brief facts of the complainant’s case is as follows :  Sri. Kurian the father of 1^st complainant and husband of 2^nd complainant deposited an amount of `21,047 with opposite party (FDR No. 81/2000) for 12 months. The interest for the period was `1789 (@8.5%) per annum and the due date was on 31.05.2001.  After the death of Kurian the complainants applied and they were given DD for `30,726 Bank has to pay `42,813 calculating interest @8.5% per annum.  But opposite party paid only `30,726.  Complaints were rejected on the ground that the deposit was not renewed and therefore rate applicable to fixed deposit cannot be given.  The deposit is made by the MACT and the complainants cannot renew the deposit or withdraw the amount without the permission of the tribunal.  The opposite party was in custody of the amount `30,726 in fixed deposit for 146 months from 02.06.2001 onwards.  Complainants are entitled for interest at the rate of 8.5%.  Legal notice was sent but only replied justifying their stand.  Hence this complaint.

          Pursuant to the notice opposite party entered appearance and filed version denying the allegations of complainants.  The contentions of opposite party in short is as follows.  After the death of Kurian the complainants approached opposite party for releasing the fixed deposit.  On production of necessary documents FD was released and gave DD. The deposit was made @ 8.5% per annum.  No complaint was raised at the time of receiving the amount. Objection was first raised through legal notice.  The FD dated 02.06.2000 from MACT Thalassery was matured on 31.05.2001.  As per the procedure of RBI to be followed in dealing with interest for FD in the event of death of the depositor the Bank shall pay interest at the contracted rate till the date of maturity and simple interest thereafter.  On the basis of said calculation opposite party has given DD of `30,726 by taking 4% interest after maturity.  There is no negligence on the part of opposite party.  Hence to dismiss the complaint.

          On the above pleadings the following issues have been raised for consideration.

1.           Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?

2.           Whether the complainants are entitled for the remedy as prayed for?

3.           Relief and cost.

The evidence consists of Ext.A1, A2 and Ext.X1 to X3 on the side of complainant.  Opposite party produced on direction the original of A1 and A2 and the same marked as Ext.X1 to X3.

Issues No.1 to 3 :

          Admittedly opposite party has released the fixed deposit and gave DD to the complainants for `30,726.  On the basis of calculation of interest at the rate of 8.5% from the date of deposit to the maturity date and thereafter at the rate of 4% till the date of payment.  The case of complainant is that complainants are entitled for interest at the rate of 8.5% for the entire period from the date of deposit to the date of payment.  The method of payment of interest had been informed to complainant by the reply notice to the lawyer notice of complainant.

          The specific case of the opposite party is that the opposite party / bank had given interest for the fixed deposit as per the procedure of RBI. Accordingly Bank had given contract rate (8.5%) till the date of maturity date and from the date of maturity to the date of payment 4% (Savings Bank deposit rate).  Since the DD covers the amount as per following the procedure of RBI there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.

          However complainant has no case that RBI procedure is not applicable to complainant.  In short the main question is whether the bank reduced the interest rate for the amount after the maturity period on any legal basis or in accordance with their wish and pleasure.  If it based on a principle backed by legal procedures, it is not possible to castgate opposite party/ Bank upon the deficiency in service.

          Opposite party /Bank pleaded that the bank has to follow the procedure of RBI and according to RBI the interest for a fixed deposit is as follows :

(1)In the event of death of the depositor before the date of maturity and the amount of deposit is claimed after the date of maturity the bank shall pay interest :

a)     At the contracted rate till the date of maturity

b)     From the date of maturity to the date of payment.

simple interest at the applicable rate prevailing on the date of maturity for the period for which the deposit remained with the bank beyond the date of maturity.

          Opposite party further pleaded that on the basis of above said calculation bank has given DD of `30,726 by taking the interest @4% for the period beyond the date of maturity apart from the contracted rate till the date of maturity. 

          The contention raised by opposite party on the legality of interest calculation has not been challenged by the complainant by adducing evidence. Thus it can only be considered that there is no basic challenge raising specific contention on the side of complainant with respect to the procedure followed by opposite party / bank.  Hence we are of considered opinion that there is no substance in the pleadings of complainant.  The issues No.1 to 3 are decided against complainant.

          In the result, the complaint is dismissed.

          No cost.

Dated this the 29^th day of September, 2012.

                            Sd/-                     Sd/-       

                        President             Member           

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the Complainant

A1. Copy of lawyer notice dated 04.01.2012.

A2. Reply letter dated 24.01.2012.

Exhibits for the opposite parties

Nil

Exhibits for the Court

X1.  Fixed deposit receipt.

X2.  Letter dated 29.11.2011.

X3.  Fixed deposit ledger sheet.

Witness examined for the complainant

Nil

Witness examined for opposite party

Nil

                                                                        /forwarded by order/

                                                                     SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT