1.     Heard Mr. P.K. Choudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant on limitation and on merit.

2.       He explained the delay of about 17 days in filing this appeal.

3.       On merits, he assailed the impugned order on various grounds.

4.       The present complaint case was filed by the complainant/ appellant alleging that the opposite party/ respondent did not issue no dues certificate which was a deficiency in service.

5.       After hearing the  parties and considering the respective cases of the parties, the learned District Forum has interalia held that the complainant was a defaulter, which appeared from Ext.2 filed by him . He paid only Rs. 1184/- against the dues of Rs. 60,265/-. Further he could not explain as to why he did not pay the said amount.

6.       According to the O.P. it suffered loss as it had to return the said amount to the Reserve Bank of India.

7.       Relying on a judgement of Hon’ble National Commission passed in Revision Petition No. 2757/2012 Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd., Vs Nilmani Satpati, the complaint was dismissed holding that the parties were bound by the terms of the contract.

8.       Even, if the delay of 17 days is condoned, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. According this appeal is dismissed.

          Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.