F.A. 107/2008  against C.C. 49/2007 ,  Dist. Forum, Ranga Reddy

Between:

Andhra Bank, Saroornagar Branch

Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy Dist.

Rep. by its Branch Manager                                 ***                           Appellant/

                      O.P.    

                                                                             And

1)  Smt. V. J. Lalitha, W/o. V. L. N. Rao

Age: 64 years.

2)  V.L.N. Rao, S/o. V.R.K. Sastry

Age: 65 years, H.No. 11-5-57/5

Road No. 14, Venkateswara Colony

Saroornagar

Ranga Reddy Dist.                                      ***                         Respondents/

                                                                                                Complainants

Counsel for the  Appellant:                         M/s. K. Sridhar Rao.  

Counsel for the  Respondents:                   P.I.P.  

CORAM:

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT.

                                                                   &

                                          SMT. M. SHREESHA, MEMBER.
                                                         

TUESDAY, THIS THE TWENTIETH  DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND TEN

ORAL ORDER:  (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.Appa Rao, President.)

***

1)                This is an appeal preferred by   Andhra Bank the opposite party  against the order of the Dist. Forum directing it to pay Rs. 12,476/- together with interest and costs.

2)                 The case of the complainants in brief is that they had deposited four Kalpataruvu   Term Deposits   of Rs. 1, 25,000/- each on 15.6.2001 carrying interest @ 10.5% payable monthly.    However on maturity the appellant had paid 10% interest on the deposits deducting  Rs. 8,640/-.  Thinking that it was towards TDS they kept quiet.  When it was calculated, they came to know that interest was calculated at 10% p.a. and there were belated payments. They were entitled to Rs. 8,640/-  towards wrong calculation of  interest, and Rs. 7,258/-  towards interest for belated payments  together with compensation of Rs,10,000/-towards mental agony and costs. 

3)                The appellant bank did not contest.   After receiving the affidavit of the complainant and  Ex. A1  letter of complainant Dt. 10.6.2006 together with bank statement   Ex. A2  the Dist. Forum opined that  an amount of Rs. 8,640/- was deducted towards TDS, however  no certificate was furnished to that  extent.    An amount of Rs. 3,836/- was entitled to by the complainants towards wrong calculation of interest and therefore directed the appellant to pay the said amount with interest and costs.

4)                Aggrieved by the said decision, the bank preferred the appeal contending that the order of the Dist. Forum is unsustainable.    It had deducted the TDS as per the Income Tax Act and Rules, and  a certificate could be given  only at request.    Apart from it, as per the norms of R.B.I.  discounted interest at 9.91% p.a., was calculated and thereafter on receipt of complaint   it was calculated at 10.40% p.a., and the difference of amount of Rs. 7,258/- was credited to their account besides interest of Rs. 444/- for belated payment for 21 months.  This was not brought to  the notice of the Dist. Forum as they could not contest the matter.   After receipt of notice, it was entrusted to  their  standing counsel  Sri  Ch. Srinivas.  He could not appear  as he mixed up  the notice with other papers and lost site of the same.   When they received the order from the Dist. Forum  they could know  that the advocate did not contest.   When contacted, he informed that  he was under  impression that the case referred to by the appellant relates to  appeal F.A. No. 1624/2007 pending before the State Commission, and as there is no provision  to set-aside the ex-parte order and as such appeal is to be preferred and  they prayed that an opportunity  be given to contest the matter. 

5)                 The point that arises for consideration is whether the order of the Dist. Forum is vitiated by mis- appreciation of fact or law?

6)                 It is an undisputed fact  the complainants had deposited  four KTDs on 15.6.2001  for Rs. 1,25,000/- each carrying  interest @ 10.5%  payable monthly.    The dispute was as to the deduction of amount towards TDS and the amount  payable towards  interest, and  also the  interest  for  belated  payments.  

The complainants assert that certificate informing that  TDS deducted was  given.  The bank  alleges that  unless one seeks for such certificate it will not be given.      However, in view of the fact that the matter pertains to  payment of interest,  deduction of TDS and interest for delayed payments, we are of the opinion that one more chance could be given to the appellant,  it being a nationalized bank.  If the bank had not followed the  RBI norms as well as  Income Tax Act and Rules, undoubtedly it would constitute deficiency in service.   Had the bank filed the necessary documents and the complainant is equally able to answer  we could have disposed of the  appeal  without there being  a  remand to the Dist. Forum.   In the light of the fact that  the issues  involve  does not take much time, it is better to remand the matter to Dist. Forum to resolve the matter after affording opportunity to both sides to adduce evidence  etc.    We are of the opinion that it is a fit case, where the bank should be given an opportunity  to contest the matter.    Admittedly there are latches on the part of bank. 

7)                 In the circumstances the appeal is allowed setting aside the order of the Dist. Forum.   The matter is remitted to Dist. Forum  on  appellant paying costs of Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant before 2.8.2010.     Both parties are directed to appear before the Dist. Forum  on 2. 8.2010 without insisting on fresh notice.  The Dist. Forum is directed to give  opportunity  to the appellant to file written version  and both sides to adduce  evidence, and dispose of the matter   within two months from the date of receipt of this order.  

1)       _______________________________

PRESIDENT                 

2)      ________________________________

 MEMBER          

*pnr                                                                         Dt.  20.  07.  2010.

“UP LOAD – O.K.”