This case was adjourned on 14.7.2009 with costs of Rs.3,000/- payable by the respondent.  The costs were not paid.  The case was listed on 10.8.2009.  The costs of Rs.3,000/- had not been paid.  Counsel for the respondent sought another adjournment which was granted subject to further payment of Rs.1,000/- as costs.  The case was adjourned to   22.2.2010.  Inspite of two adjournments given to

-2-

the respondent to file the calculations of the amount due, the respondent did not file the calculations.   At the request of counsel for the respondent, the case was adjourned for today subject to payment of further costs of Rs.5,000/-. 

Counsel for the respondent has handed over a cheque bearing No.099583 of Oriental Bank of Commerce drawn in favour of Sh.Jawahar Chawla, counsel for the petitioner for the sum of Rs.9,000/- being the total amount of costs of three adjournments.  Counsel for the petitioner accepts the payment of costs subject to realization and  undertakes to remit the sum of Rs.9,000/- to the petitioner/complainant.

Counsel for the respondent has not filed the calculations.  He states that the respondent is not in a position to file the calculations.

Respondent Unit Trust of India had floated multi-benefit Savings Plan under Salary Saving Scheme of Units and the petitioner joined the Scheme & contributed Rs.250/- per month w.e.f. February, 1985 and the said contribution was forwarded by his Employer  Reserve Bank of India out of the monthly salary of the petitioner into

-3-

respondent’s Account.  The said contribution was for a period of ten years and the same was to mature in January/August, 1995.  As per scheme, the respondent had agreed to pay interest which was to be declared by the respondent every year in the month of July.  According to the petitioner, the Maturity proceeds under the petitioner’s membership came to Rs.72,014.55 paise whereas according to the respondent, it came to Rs.60,104.24 paise.  In addition, Maturity Bonus of 5% was to be paid.  Petitioner filed the complaint before the District Forum as according to him, the respondent was liable to pay Rs.75,000/-.

This is not in dispute before us that the respondent had paid Rs.14,402.91 paise on 20.8.1995 for half yearly installments of Rs.1500/- each amounting to Rs.6,000/- against the petitioner’s membership and further, remitted a sum of Rs.45,701.33 in July 1996 along with interest.  petitioner filed the complaint alleging that the respondent had failed to pay the proper dues to the respondent and according to him, the following amounts were still due:

i.          Balance amount                                              :           Rs.11,910.71

ii.          Interest @ 16% p.a. w.e.f.August, 1995         :           Rs.18,089.29

Iii          Comepnsation and Maturity Bonus                :           Rs. 45,000.00

Total                                                                            Rs. 75,000.00

-4-

District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the respondent to pay a compensation of Rs.5,000/- and costs of Rs.500/-.  The order of the District Forum was complied with.

Petitioner filed an appeal before the State Commission.  The State Commission vide the impugned order directed the respondent to pay another sum of Rs.11,910.30 paise being the difference between Rs.72,014.95 claimed by the petitioner and Rs.60,104.24     which had been paid by the respondent to the petitioner.  Thus, the petitioner was held entitled to receive the total sum of Rs.72,014.95 paise besides the compensation of Rs.5,000/- and costs of Rs.500/- awarded by the District Forum.

The respondent in compliance with the order passed by the State Commission, remitted the sum of Rs.17,410.30 paise being the balance amount to the petitioner.  All these payments are not disputed.

Petitioner’s case is that he is entitled to the interest @ 16% on the maturity amount after the scheme came to an end on 20.8.1995.  It is not disputed before us that the respondent has already paid the

-5-

interest on the maturity amount @ 9% p.a.   He would not be entitled to get the interest @ 16% after the maturity date.  He has been paid interest @ 9% which in the facts and circumstances of the case, is adequate.  It would be seen that the petitioner has already been compensated adequately and no case for interference in the impugned order is made out.  Dismissed.  No costs.