Presented by Sri B.K. Pati, Member:-<br /> The present complaint pertains to deficiency in service as envisaged under the Consumer Protection Act. Its brief history is as follows:-<br /> <br /> The Complainant's case is that he made four special term deposits of Rs. 40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand)only each on Dt. 21/07/2005 with the Opposite Party No.2(two), their receipt number being No. SD/A/78-938057, No. SD/A/78-938058, No. SD/A/78/938065 and No. SD/A/78-938366 and with the date of maturity on Dt. 21/07/2008. On Dt. 07/08/2008 the Complainant presented the aforesaid receipts with the Opposite Party No.2(two) for encashment. It is alleged in the complaint that the officer of Opposite Party No.2(two) made some correction and over-writing in the receipts after they were produced for withdrawal and returned to the Complainant after a few days denying the payment of the amount. The Complainant served pleader's notice on Dt. 20/08/2008 to both the Opposite Parties requesting the payment of the amount which was not responded to. The Opposite Party No.2(two) vide his letter Dt. 10/09/2008 alleged that two receipts showing deposit of Rs. 40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand)only each, are duplicate of the original issued on the application of the Complainant. The Complainant contends that he never asked for issue of any duplicate receipts nor filed any application for the same with the Opposite Party No.2(two). Rather the Opposite Party No.2(two) threatened the Complainant to initiate criminal action against him. The said action of the Opposite Party No.2(two) and the non action of Opposite Party No.1(one) in spite of receiving pleader's notice has inflicted mental pain on the Complainant.<br /> <br /> The Complainant claims from the Opposite Parties Rs. 47,473/-(Rupees forty seven thousand four hundred seventy three) only in each deposit with 12% (twelve percent) interest from the date of maturity till payment besides damage of Rs. 40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand)only and litigation expenses of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Parties in their version denied the allegation made by the Complainant against them as false. They admit that on Dt. 21/07/2005 two special term deposits receipts bearing No. 938057 and 938058 in old Account No. 0125206199902 and 0125206199903 and New Account No. 11280497757 and 11280497768, for Rs. 40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand)only each, were issued by the Opposite Party No.2(two) infavour of the Complainant and handed over to him on his application. On Dt. 13/03/2006 the Complainant reported before the Opposite Party No.2(two) that the aforementioned special term deposit receipts had been lost and requested for issue of new ones and in response the Opposite Party No.2(two) issued two others special term deposits receipts for Rs. 40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand)only each on the same date, mentioning the date of issue Dt. 13/03/2006 for the same account numbers. The Opposite Parties contend that only two special term deposit are outstanding which the Opposite Party No.2(two) issued to the claimant on Dt. 21/07/2005 and not four as alleged by the Complainant. <br /> <br /> On Dt. 07/08/2008 when the Complainant presented all the four special term deposit receipts for payment, the Opposite Party No.2(two) came to know that the original ones are with the Complainant and so it wrote an official letter on Dt. 10/09/2008 to the Complainant requesting him to return the duplicate special term receipts to the Bank issued on Dt. 13/03/2006. But the Complainant has not returned the duplicate receipt and instead filed this complaint before the Forum.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Parties contend that they have replied to the Advocate notice on Dt. 10/09/2008. They further say that, they have never harassed the Complainant and the Complainant is not entitled to receive any cost by litigation expenses or damages for mental agony. They prayed for dismissal for the complaint.<br /> <br /> Perused the complaint, the version of the Opposite Parties and documents filed by the Parties and find as follows:-<br /> <br /> The case of the Complainant is that he had made fours special term deposits of Rs.40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand)only each on Dt. 21/07/2005 with the Opposite Party No.2(two), bearing receipt No. SD/A/78-938057, No.SD/A/78-938058, No. SD/A/78/938065 and No. SD/A/78-938366, their date of maturity being Dt. 21/07/2008. After the date of maturity, on Dt. 07/08/2008 the Complainant presented the aforesaid receipts before the Opposite Party No.2(two) for encashment of the same. The officials of Opposite Party No.2(two) made some corrections and over-writings in the receipts and after some days returned the receipts denying payment of the amount. The Complainant claims payment after maturity amount along with interest and cost.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Parties in their version contend that on Dt. 21/07/2005 only two special term deposit receipts for Rs. 40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand)only each bearing No. 938057 and No.938058 respectively were issued by the Opposite Party No.2(two) infavour of the Complainant and handed over to him on his application. On Dt. 13/03/2006 the Complainant reported before the Opposite Party No.2(two) that the above two receipts have been lost and requested for issue of new ones. The Opposite Party No.2(two) issued two duplicate special terms deposit receipts for Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand)only each. In lieu of the original ones mentioning the date of issue as on Dt.13/03/2006 for the same account numbers. <br /> <br /> On a thorough examination of the stand taken by the Complainant and the Opposite Parties it is seen that the Complainant from his side has presented four receipts of the special terms deposit, two of them having been over written and tampered with, his case being that the Officers of the Opposite Party No. 2(two) are responsible for the same. The Opposite Parties contend that two duplicate receipts of the special term deposits were issued infavour of the Complainant on Dt. 13/03/2006 on the request of the Complainant. It is also their case that only two special terms deposit are outstanding with the Opposite Party No.2(two) issued to the Complainant on Dt. 21/07/2005 and not four as alleged by the latter. The Opposite Parties have not come forward with any proof in support of their stand such as any request letter/application by the Complainant for issue of duplicate receipts or his having received the same with his signature on any documents of the Bank as testimony thereof. Any copy of the statement of account of Dt. 21/07/2005 corroborating the claim of the Opposite Parties that only two special terms deposit had been made with the Bank on the said date, has also not been filed by the Opposite Parties in support of such claim. <br /> <br /> If the Complainant made claims for four deposits but making only two special term deposits as alleged by the Opposite Parties then the Bank would be swindled of about one lakh rupees which is an act of crime to be proceeded with under the provisions of penal laws but the Opposite Parties have not taken resort to any such action against the Complainant.<br /> <br /> Such fact and circumstances as discussed above shrouds the case with a cloud of doubt and no clear picture emerges. Since the Opposite Parties have failed to discharge the onus of proving their own case with the minimum evidence, we allow the Complainant in accordance with the spirit of Consumer Protection Act-1986.<br /> In the result, the Opposite Parties are directed, jointly and severally, to pay to the Complainant the maturity amount of the four special term deposits amounting to Rs. 47,473/-(Rupees forty seven thousand four hundred seventy three)only in each deposit with 9% (nine percent) interest on the total amount chargeable with effect from the date maturity till the date of payment and a cost of Rs. 1000/-(Rupees one thousand)only within thirty days hence.<br /> <br /> Complaint allowed accordingly.<br />