Heard Learned Counsel for the appellant. None appears for respondent.

         2. This appeal has been filed U/S-15 of Consumer protection Act 1986(Hearin after called the Act) against impugned order passed by Learned District C.D.R, Commission, Cuttack. The parties are referred to in complaint case may be read as same in this appeal for convenience.

              3.  The case of the complainant in nut-shell is that the complainant had deposited a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with Allahabad Bank, Cuttack Main Branch  jointly with her husband, Sri Hari Ram Kedia under fixed deposite scheme. It is alleged that the bank agreed to pay interest @ 9.55% per annum. Since Complainant wanted to take monthly interest, the O.P bank paid her interest @ Rs.395.00 per month which comes to Rs. 4740 for one year. It is alleged inter alia that since interest @ 9.55% per annum on Rs. 50,000/- bearing Rs. 4775/- and the Bank has paid only  Rs. 4740/- during the year @ Rs. 395/- per month , as such the Bank has paid less interest amounting to Rs. 35/- .So the complainant sent a letter to the O.Ps showing deficiency in service but the same was not replied by the O.P  Bank . Finding no other way the complainant filed this case.

             4.       O P denied to ever assuring the husband of the complainant to pay the differential amount of Rs. 35/- on a future date of above deposit. Moreover, the interest rate has  not agreed payble by the  O.P.bank to the complainant

     5.         After hearing both parties Learend District Forum did not find fault with the O.P bank and directed O.P bank to give reply according to the complainant.

      6.      Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the Learend District Forum committed error in law by not awarding actual amount as agreed between parties. It is  also submitted that learend District Forum was not correct to agree with view of the O.P bank. Therefore, he submitted to set aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal. He also submitted to pay differential amount of Rs. 35/- per month on the fixed deposit of amount.

      7.    Considered the submission of the appellant, perused the DFR and impugned order.

      8.     It is admitted fact that the complainant and her husband jointly purchased the fixed deposit for Rs, 50,000/- from O.P Bank. It is also admitted fact that the complainant was to get Rs. 4775/- per interest at the rate of 395/ per month. But bank has paid 4740/- as such Rs 35/- is paid as alleged. O.P bank submits that as per guidelines of R.B I for Allahabad Bank has paid his discounted price. Therefore, the O.P paid 4740/- instead of Rs. 4775/. The example of Karnatak bank by O.P is not applicable. The O.P being national bank  is guided by R.B.I . We do not find any reason to interfere in impugned order.So, the impugned is confirmed & appeal stands dismissed.

             Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet or website of this Commission to treat same as if copy of order received from this commission.

          DFR be sent back forthwith.