Heard. 2. Short question which arise for consideration is as to whether Petitioner/O.P. was deficient in not giving the result of Examination of Economics Subject to the Respondent/Complainant for over two years when he had appeared for Examination in October/ November,2003. Further, due to this act of the petitioner whether respondent is entitled to get compensation of Rs.5,000/- for deficiency in service and for causing him mental agony and harassment. 3. Both the Fora below have given concurrent findings of facts against the petitioner. 4. Honle Supreme Court in urgaon Gramin Bank Vs. Khazani and another, IV (2012) CPJ 5 (SC)where debt amount being a paltry sum of Rs.15,000/- was not settled by the bank, it observed; . Number of litigations in our country is on the rise, for small and trivial matters, people and sometimes Central and State Governments and their instrumentalities Banks, nationalized or private, come to courts may be due to ego clash or to save the Officersskin. Judicial system is over-burdened, naturally causes delay in adjudication of disputes. Mediation centers opened in various parts of our country have, to some extent, eased the burden of the courts but we are still in the tunnel and the light is far away. On more than one occasion, this court has reminded the Central Government, State Governments and other instrumentalities as well as to the various banking institutions to take earnest efforts to resolve the disputes at their end. At times, some give and take attitude should be adopted or both will sink. Unless, serious questions of law of general importance arise for consideration or a question which affects large number of persons or the stakes are very high, Courts jurisdiction cannot be invoked for resolution of small and trivial matters. We are really disturbed by the manner in which those types of matters are being brought to courts even at the level of Supreme Court of India and this case falls in that category 5. Since, a paltry sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) only is involved in this case and petitioner being an Institution of National level, we are not inclined to pass any order in this case, in view of the decision of Gurgaon Gramin Bank(supra). However, the question of law is left open to be decided in an appropriate case. 6. Vide order 01.12.2008, passed by this Commission, respondent was granted permission to withdraw the sum of Rs.5,000/-. Hence, respondent is at liberty to withdraw that amount of Rs.5000/- from the State Commission. 7. With these observations, present revision petition stands disposed of.