Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

The complaint case filed by the Appellant since been dismissed by the Ld. District Forum vide impugned order, aggrieved with such decision, this Appeal is preferred by Miss Kriti Kayal. 

The dispute revolves around non-renewal of a Fixed Deposit of the Appellant. 

Both sides were heard in the matter and documents on record gone through.

It is the case of the Appellant that as per the terms and conditions given overleaf of the Fixed Deposit Certificate, unless any written instruction was communicated to it otherwise, it was obligatory on the part of the Respondent Bank to renew the policy automatically.  According to the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant, in not doing so, the Respondent committed an act of deficiency in service.

At the time of hearing, Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Bank claimed that the Appellant gave clear instruction in writing to send the maturity proceeds to her by issuing a Demand Draft and accordingly, due compliance was made.  It was another matter that the concerned DD was returned to the Bank undelivered. 

In absence of any documentary proof from the side of the Respondent in support of such contention, I am unable to derive at any conclusive decision in the matter.  Further, it appears that the instant complaint case was dismissed at the admission stage itself.

Considering above aspects, I am constrained to remand the case to the Forum below for fresh adjudication of the matter in accordance with law and pass a reasoned order on merit.

The impugned order is hereby set aside.  Appeal, thus, stands allowed in part.

Parties to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 06-12-2019.