Per Mr P N Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member
None is present for appellant. Adv. Mr Dhande for respondent is present.
This appeal is filed by the original complainant whose complaint was dismissed by District Consumer Forum, Nagpur by passing judgement on 27.07.2007 in consumer complaint No. CC/07/215.
The facts to the extent material may be stated as under:-
1. The complainant is a daughter of Smt Vimal Ramchandra Kale. Her mother had deposited an amount of Rs.13,000/- with o.p. No. 2 – Vidarbha Premier Housing Soc. Ltd. for a period of one year and its maturity date was 23.01.2007 and payable interest on the said deposit was @ 8% p.a. Complainant stated that her mother expired on 23.12.2006 and she had executed the Will, which is registered by the Sub-Registrar, Nagpur-1 and by way of said will mother of the complainant bequeathed her property including bank balance in favour of the complainant. Complainant pleaded that she applied by furnishing the copy of Will to o.ps for releasing the amount deposited by her mother. But o.ps demanded her probate or letter of administration. Complainant further pleaded that she was unnecessarily harassed by the o.ps and probate was not necessary. Therefore she sent legal notice to o.ps. But it was not complied with. So she filed consumer complaint for getting the maturity amount of FDR.
2. O.p. filed their written statement and admitted that the deceased Vimal Ramchandra Kale had deposited an amount of Rs.13,000/- for a period of one year and its maturity date as23.01.2007. O.ps pleaded that deceased had not made any nominee for the said FDR. O.ps further admitted that complainant had applied alongwith copy of Will and she also furnished affidavit dtd.23.12.2006 to o.ps for withdrawal of said Fix Deposit amount. However, brothers of the complainant Mr Vinod Ramchandra Kale and Mr Pramod Ramchandra Kale had also filed application for withdrawal of FDR and therefore, they had directed the complainant to produce succession certificate as there was an objection from the others for withdrawal the FDR amount.
3. Considering the stands of the rival parties the Forum below held that since brother of the complainant challenged the Will before competent court, it is not just and proper to decide the present complaint as it was already subjudice before the Civil Court. The Forum below held that there is no substance in the complaint and hence was pleased to dismiss the complaint. Hence, against this dismissal original complainant filed this appeal.
4. We perused the impugned order and the documents on record.
5. We are finding that the order passed by the Forum below is just and proper and it is sustainable in Law. The depositor had not given any name as nominee while depositing the amount in FDR. The respondents were within its right to ask the appellant / complainant to produce either succession certificate or to obtain probate since, respondent relying upon the registered Will executed by her deceased mother who was the depositor. Since Will was not probated the District Consumer Forum rightly held that they cannot decide the complaint in favour of the appellant / complainant and the Forum also observed that the matter was subjudice before the Civil Court since the brothers of appellant had already challenged the Will.
6. In the circumstances, we are finding that the order passed by the Forum is just and proper and sustainable in law.
Hence, we pass the following order:-
ORDER
1. Appeal is dismissed.
2. No order as to cost.
3. Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced on 20.07.2011
