Presented by Sri Gouri Shankar Pradhan, President:-<br /> The present complaint pertains to deficiency in service as envisaged under the provision of Consumer Protection Act and its brief fact is as follows:-<br /> <br /> The Complainant is an employee in the District Statistical Office and is entitled to get F.T.A. for a sum of Rs.600/-(Rupees six hundred)only out of Rs.17,495/-(Rupees seventeen thousand four hundred ninety five)only deposited by the District Statistical Office before the State Bank of India, Main Branch, Bargarh to be credited in Complainant's State Bank Account No.11042777985 by the Opposite Party Bank. But the amount was not credited to his account No.11042777985. Since the amount was not credited to his account he drew the attention of D.S.O. who intimated the Opposite Party Bank vide his letter No.630 Dt.20/05/2006 to deposit the amount in his account. In spite of several request made by the Complainant and the letter from the D.S.O, the Opposite Party did not credit the amount in his account which amounts to deficiency of service by the Opposite Party. For such act of the Opposite Party, the Complainant suffered both mentally and physically.<br /> <br /> Alleging deficiency in service by the Opposite Party, the Complainant filed this case claiming a sum of Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees five thousand)only towards traveling and miscellaneous expenses, Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only towards mental and physical pain, Rs.3,000/-(Rupees three thousand)only towards litigation expenses and Rs.600/-(Rupees six hundred)only to be deposited in his account bearing No. 11042777985.<br /> <br /> In its version the Opposite Party Bank denied the allegation of deficiency in service towards the Complainant and submitted that, the Complainant has not furnished the date on which the amount was deposited and whether such deposit was in cash or from any account and if out of an account, what was the account number. With out complete information/particulars and in absence of District Statistical Officer, who is the best person to say/produce documents relating to the deposit, the matter cannot be adjudicate properly. The Opposite Party contend that the D.S.O. was responsible to deposit a sum of Rs.600/-(Rupees six hundred)only in the account of the Complainant, said office should have been prosecuted for non depositing the said amount in the account of the Complainant. If at all the D.S.O. had deposited the amount as aforesaid to be credited to the Complainant's account, it is the District Statical Officer who could agitate the matter and not the Complainant. Further the Opposite Party contends that, on verification of the Complainant's account with the Opposite Party, it was found that a sum of Rs.600/-(Rupees six hundred)only should have been credited to his account since Dt.23/02/2006, but the said amount had wrongly been credited to one account No.11042768755 and the error in posting being found out has already been corrected/regularized. There is no cause of action for the case and prays for dismissal of the case.<br /> <br /> We have gone through the complaint petition version of Opposite Party as well as the copy of documents filed by the Parties and find as follows.<br /> <br /> The Complainant being an employee of District Statical Office is legally entitled to the sum of Rs.600/-(Rupees six hundred)only and to be credited to his new Saving Bank Account No. 11042777985 out of Rs.17,495/-(Rupees seventeen thousand four hundred ninety five)only deposited by the District Statical Office before the Opposite Party Bank to be paid to thirty six person. The Opposite Party Bank is duty bound to give proper service in respect of crediting the amount in his account. But in spite of repeated approach by the Complainant as well as the letter No. 630 Dt.20/05/2006 with payment schedule for the month of February-2006 by the District Statistical Officer, requesting the Opposite Party Bank to credit the amount in his account, the Opposite Bank did not credit the amount till the date of filing of this complaint i.e. Dt.15/05/2009. The Opposite Party Bank in its version also admits that an amount of Rs.600/-(Rupees six hundred)only should have been credited to his account since Dt.23/01/2006, but the said amount had wrongly been credited to one account bearing No.11042768755 . The error in posting being found out has already been corrected/regularised.<br /> <br /> On perusal of the copy of Pass Book of the complainant it is found that, the amount has been credited only on Dt.16/06/2009 after filing of this present complaint. The Opposite Party without any cause kept the amount in his hand with out the fault of the Complainant for more than three years (from the letter of the D.S.O. to the Opposite Party Bank), is amounts to deficiency in service by the Opposite Party Bank towards the Complainant. <br /> <br /> The Complainant has well established a case of deficiency of service by the Opposite Party towards the Complainant, and is entitled for interest for the aforesaid period over the amount of Rs.600/-(Rupees six hundred)only, compensation towards mental agony and litigation cost.<br /> <br /> In view of above discussion, the Compliant is allowed and ordered as follows:-<br /> <br /> The Opposite Party Bank is directed to give 9%(nine percent) interest on the amount i.e. Rs.600/-(Rupees six hundred)only from Dt.20/05/2006 to Dt.15/06/2009, Rs.1,000/-(Rupees one thousand)only compensation towards mental agony and physical pain and Rs.500/-(Rupees five hundred)only towards litigation cost to the Complainant within thirty days from the date of this Order or else the total awarded amount shall carry 18%(eighteen percent) interest till payment.<br /> <br /> Complaint allowed accordingly.