JUSTICE V.K.JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL)

          Punjab National Bank which is appellant in FA No.1032/2018 and respondent no. 1 in FA No. 1111/2018 had two FDRs of Rs.4 lacs each, one in the name of Late Sh. Gyan Chand and the other in the joint name of Lt. Sh. Gyan Chand and his wife Lt. Smt. Leelawati.  On maturity of the aforesaid two FDRs, proceeds could not be released on account of some civil disputes.  The FDRs were not presented to the bank alongwith requisite endorsement.  As a result, the FDR proceeds could not be paid to the FDR holders and the bank continued to utilize the amount of the FDRs as well as the interest which had accrued on that.  The civil disputes were eventually settled vide settlement dated 31.03.2013.  Three appeals pending before Punjab & Haryana High Court at that date being FAO No.1026/1995, 1047/1998 and 1048/1998 were disposed of in terms of the said settlement.  Punjab National Bank was a party in Civil Appeal No.1047/1998, which was one of the appeals disposed of in terms of the said settlement.  The High Court vide order dated 30.01.2014, disposed of the appeals in terms of the above referred settlement dated 31.03.2013 which was placed on the record of the Court as Annexure-A1 with CM No. 8556-C of 2013.  The decree passed by the High Court in terms of the said settlement clearly recorded that the appeals were disposed of in terms of the settlement dated 31.03.2013 (Annexure-A1) filed alongwith CM No. 8556-C of 2013.  Since Punjab National Bank was a party to RSA No. 1047 of 1998, it became bound by the order whereby the said appeal was disposed of.  One of the terms of the settlement was that the principal amount of Rs.4 lacs each lying as term deposit with Punjab National Bank would be released to Smt. Subhash Thukral, legal heir of Lt. Sh. Gyan Chand and Lt. Smt. Leelawati with upto date interest applicable to term deposits (emphasis applied).  Despite being a party to the aforesaid RSA, Punjab National Bank did not challenge the aforesaid order nor did it contend before the High Court that it was not liable to pay interest on term deposits but was liable to pay only the interest applicable on saving bank accounts.  Therefore, the aforesaid term requiring the bank to release FDRs of Rs.4 lacs each to Smt. Subhash Thukral alongwith upto date interest applicable to term deposit became binding upon it. 

2.      In view of the settlement dated 31.03.2013, which formed basis of the order dated 30.01.2014, passed by the High Court in RSA No. 1047/1998, the bank is liable to pay the entire principal amount of both the FDRs to Smt. Subhash Thukral alongwith interest applicable from time to time on the term deposits.  Since both the term deposits were for a period of 183 days each, the bank is liable to pay interest which was applicable from time to time on the term deposits of 183 days. 

3.      For the reasons stated hereinabove, both the appeals stand disposed of.  The payment in terms of this order shall be made within eight weeks from today.