Per Mr. S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Judicial Member :

          Parties present are heard.  This appeal is not pressed against the respondent No.2, Superintendent, R.T.O. Office.  Otherwise also he is not a proper or necessary party. Since there is no direction against it as well as against the other original opponents, since the complaint is dismissed against them, direction was only against the Branch Manager, Bank of Maharashtra, Branch Banda, District Sawantwadi and who is appellant before us.

          This appeal takes an exception against the order dated 26.2.2009 passed in consumer  complaint No. 207/08, Shri  Prakash Shankar Kubal V/s Branch Manager, Bank of Maharashtra, Branch Banda & Ors. by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sindhudurg (‘the Forum’ in short).  The complaint was partly allowed and the appellant/original opponent No.1 was directed to refund the amount of `1,50,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a.  Fully aggrieved by this, appeal is preferred by the said opponent No.1.

          The appeal was admitted on 16^th September 2010.  The respondent/original complainant Prakash S. Kubal present in person.  He has brought on record certified copies of the record showing that in a Lok Adalat, the dispute was settled amicably and compromise was reached between the contesting parties and accordingly, as per the said settlement, the complainant has received compensation and also bank had received possession of the vehicle and further certified that there are no dues payable by the original complainant.  The original possession  letter dated 1.2.2011 issued by the Bank is also produced on record.

          When attention of the Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant is brought to these documents, she has submitted that she is unable to make any statement in respect of these documents, for want of any instruction received from the appellant.  However, we find that the document being certified copy and the original document which is undisputed, can be taken into account and relied upon safely.  Under the circumstances, since the dispute is settled out of the Commission during the pendency of this appeal, the appeal became infructuous.  Under the circumstances, we hold accordingly and pass the following order :

O R D E R

          The appeal stands dismissed as become infructuous in view of the settlement between the contesting parties.  Under the given circumstances, no order as to cost.

Pronounced dated 21^st November 2011.