J U D G E M E N T

               Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of this case are re-capitulated as under :-

            In a concise, the case as stated in the Complaint, is that, the Complainant had deposited a sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- only by cheque dated 25.04.2011 in the Opposite Party Bank as Term Deposit for 1,000 days @ 9.25 % interest per annum on 25.04.2011 which would be matured on 19.01.2014 at matured value of Rs. 2,05,480/- only for which the Opposite Party Bank was duly issued a Certificate being No. TD CS/025  0151177 in favour of the Complainant.

             After expire of the said stipulated time period on due date the Complainant severally requested the Opposite Party Bank to pay the entire matured amount towards the complainant,  but the Opposite Parties never paid any heed to it. Ultimately the Complainant applied before the Branch Manager of the Opposite Party Bank replying which the Opposite Party Bank sent a letter dated 16.12.2014 to the Complainant to settle the matter amicably but failed to pay the said matured amount to the Complainant, what amounts to negligence and deficiency in service on part of the Opposite Party and caused mental agony and harassment to the Complainant for which he had asked for compensation. Hence, this case is filed for seeking adequate redressal before this Forum.       

                   Resisting the Complaint, the Opposite Party filed the Written Version for denying the contentions and all material allegations made by the Complainant in the Petition of Complaint and stating inter alia, that the Complainant has no cause of action to file the instant case, the case is not maintainable, is bad/defect for necessary party and the case is liable to be dismissed.

            The specific case as stated by the Opposite Party in gist is that at the time the Complainant asked for the maturity amount this Opposite Party has checked all relevant documents including the vouchers of that day when the alleged Term deposit Receipt was issued in favour of the Complainant but could not able to find out any debit or credit transaction for the said amount of Rs. 1,60,000/- only and also found that the said amount neither credited nor debited from the Bank Account of the Complainant but astonishingly the S T D R Receipt was issued inadvertently and was handed over the same towards the Complainant. However this Opposite Party has already referred the matter to the Higher Authority of the Bank for amicable solution, if any.

             Thus this Opposite Party denied any negligence or/ and deficiency in rendering service towards the Complainant by any means and prayed for dismissal of the instant case against him.

                                                                         Points for Determination

               1.  Is the complaint maintainable under the C. P. Act ?

               2.  Was there any negligence or deficiency in service

                                      on the part of the O.Ps ?

               3.  Is the complainant entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?            

                                                                              Decision with Reasons

            All the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of convenience and brevity.

            The main dispute between the Complainant and the Opposite Party is that whether the Opposite Party bank is liable for not disbursing the matured value of the said Term Deposit Certificate in issue dated 25.04.2011 towards the Complainant or not. 

             We have carefully considered and scrutinized the submission made before us by the Complainant in person and also critically perused all the material documents on record filed by the Complainant and vigilantly gone through the ‘Brief Note of Argument’ submitted by the Ld. Advocate for the Opposite Party Bank as neither the Ld. Advocate nor any official representative was present at the time of hearing the argument on the date fixed on behalf of the Opposite Party Bank.  

              On overall evaluation of the argument advanced by the Complainant in person and on critical appreciation of the case record, it is clearly evident that admittedly the Complainant is an Account Holder of a Savings Account, being Account No. 20075662855 under the Opposite party Bank, SBI.

             The record reveals that on 25.04.2011, the Complainant had deposited an amount of Rs. 1,60,000/- only through a cheque being No. 548022, dated 25.04.2011 of the Opposite Party Bank from his SBI Savings Account as Term deposit for 1,000 days @ 9.25 % per annum on 25.04.2011 and accordingly the Opposite Party SBI Bank had duly issued a ‘Special / Term Deposit Receipt’ (the original of which is submitted by the Complainant) in favour of the Complainant.

             Manifestly it is evident from the said ‘Special / Term Deposit Receipt’ dated 25.04.2011 issued in favour of the Complainant that it is explicitly and visibly written upon that ‘Term Deposit Certificate’ in dispute that the amount deposited by the Complainant named Mr. Sanjay Mal is of Rs. 1,60,000/- only on 25.04.2011 for the stipulated period of 1,000 days, the rate of interest upon the said deposited amount is @ 9.25% per annum, the amount due on 19.01.2014 and the amount payable on maturity at Rs. 2,05,480/- only, which proves beyond any doubt that the Complainant is a bonafide consumer under the opposite Party Bank and has the every legal right to get the refund of the money at its matured value on the date of its maturity from the Opposite Party SBI Bank.

             Moreover, the Opposite Party Bank never denied the said alleged fact that the Complainant did not ever issued the cheque in favour of the SBI Bank on 25.04.2011 on which day the Opposite Party Bank had issued the said ‘Term Deposit Certificate’ in question.

              So it is the severe duty of the Opposite Party Bank Authority to debit the said amount from the Savings Account from the Complainant and further to credit the same in the Term Deposit account of the Complainant for which the Opposite Party Bank authority had issued the ‘Special / Term Deposit Receipt’ dated 25.04.2011 in favor of the Complainant.

             Now, when after expire of the term/stipulated time period the Complainant claimed his matured value of money from the Opposite Party Bank at this time the Opposite Party noticed the truth that the said amount neither at all debited from the account of the Complainant not the same be credited to the ‘Term Deposit’ Account of the Complainant.

             But it is neither the fault/mistake on part of the Complainant nor it is the responsibility of the Complainant to recognize the blunder of the Opposite Party Bank and to point out the same before the Bank authority.

             So it is manifestly apparent from the divergence/conflict from both parties that the Opposite Party Bank authority had failed to perform their severe responsibility by neither debited nor credited the said amount of Rs. 1,60,000/- only from and towards the Complainant which was/is certainly the infrastructural defect and/or mistake in procedure on part of the Opposite Party Bank for which the Complainant being a bonafide consumer cannot be the sufferer/victim.

             So the fact remains that the Complainant had actually deposited the amount of Rs. 1,60,000/- only towards the Opposite Party Bank on 25.04.2011 through a cheque of the same Bank for ‘Term Deposit’ which would be matured on 19.01.2014 with matured value of Rs. 2,05,480/- only for which the Opposite Party Bank Authority was duly issued the ‘Special / Term Deposit Receipt’ dated 25.04.2011in favour of the Complainant but due to infrastructural defect and/or mistake in procedure on part of the Opposite Party Bank Authority the said amount was neither debited from the account of the Complainant nor credited towards the Term deposit account of the Complainant for which the Complainant never be the victim and suffer of the fact.

                         Thus, the unanimous decision of the Forum is that the Opposite Party is still liable to pay the matured amount of Rs. 2,05,480/- only to the Complainant and is also liable for negligence and/or deficiency in rendering proper service towards the Complainant by not repaying the matured amount along with interest @ 9.25%  per annum from the date of maturity till its realization in favour of the Complainant and for such negligent and/or deficient act the Opposite Party Bank is further liable to pay the adequate compensation towards the Complainant.

             Therefore, in light of the above analysis, we are inclined to hold that the Complainant has proved his case successfully and is entitled to get the relief as prayed for and consequently the points for determination are decided in affirmative.

             In short, the Complainant deserves success.

             In the result, we proceed to pass 

                                                                                                        O R D E R 

             That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against the Opposite Part with cost of Rs. 5,000/- only payable by the Opposite Party within one month from the date of this ‘Order’ .

              That the Opposite Party is directed to refund the matured amount of Rs. 2,05,480/- only in total along with interest @ 9.25 % per annum from the date of maturity i.e. from 19.01.2014 till its actual realization towards the Complainant within one month from the date of this ‘Order’ .

             That the Opposite Party is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- only as compensation for harassment and mental agony to the Complainant within one month from the date of this ‘Order’ .

              In the event of non compliance of any portion of the order by the Opposite Party within a period of one month from the date of this ‘Order’, the Opposite Party shall have to pay a sum of Rs. 200/- per day, from the date of this ‘Order’ till its realization, as punitive damages, which amount shall be deposited by the Opposite Party  in the Consumer Legal Aid Fund.

             Let copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.