State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Punjab National Bank vs Sada Nand on 8 January, 2015
Anant Ram Negi Vs. UIIC & Anr. (F.A. No.228/2013) H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHIMLA, CAMP AT NAHAN. First Appeal No: 357/2014. Date of Presentation: 14.10.2014. Date of Decision: 08.01.2015. Punjab National Bank, Branch Office Nahan, H.P., through its Manager. Appellant. Versus Shri Sada Nand Chauhan, S/o Shri Buti Nath, R/o Mohalla Govindgarh, Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P. Respondent. ........................................................................................... For the Appellant: Mr. Karan Thakur, Advocate vice Mr. G.S. Rathour, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. V.R. Chauhan, Advocate. ................................................................................................... AND First Appeal No: 423/2014. Date of Presentation: 04.12.2014. Date of Decision: 08.01.2015. . Sada Nand Chauhan, S/o Shri Buti Nath, R/o Mohalla Govindgarh, Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P. Appellant. Versus Punjab National Bank, Branch Office Nahan, H.P., Through its Manager. Respondent. .............................................................................. Coram Honble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, President Honble Mrs. Prem Chauhan, Member Honble Mr. Vijay Pal Khachi, Member Whether approved for reporting?[1] For the Appellant: Mr. V.R. Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Karan Thakur, Advocate vice Mr. G.S. Rathour, Advocate. O R D E R:
Justice Surjit Singh, President (Oral) By this common order we proceed to dispose of two cross appeals. The appeals are directed against the order dated 23.08.2014, of learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sirmaur at Nahan. One appeal has been filed by the complainant and the other by the opposite party.
Appeal filed by the complainant is F.A. No.423/014, titled Sada Nand Chauhan vs. Punjab National Bank, and the appeal filed by the opposite party is F.A.No.357/2014, titled Punjab National Bank vs. Sada Nand Chauhan. Appeal filed by the complainant is barred by time and, therefore, an application for condonation of delay has been moved. The application is M.A. No.978/2014. In view of the fact that appeal filed by the opposite party has been admitted and because of that we are to deal with the matter on merits, delay in filing the appeal by the complainant is condoned and the same is admitted.
2. Facts relevant for the disposal of the appeals may be noticed. Complainant-Sada Nand Chauhan invested an amount of Rs.2,51,243/- with the opposite party-bank on 12.04.1993, for a period of eight years. The deposit was to mature on 12.04.2001 and on the maturity, a sum of Rs.5,46,124/- was payable to the complainant. Complainant did not ask for the payment of the money on the maturity of the deposit. He approached the opposite party on 27.08.2008, through application, Annexure R I, in which it was stated that the receipt of deposit had been misplaced and the money due against the receipt be transferred to his savings bank account.
The opposite party asked the complainant to furnish indemnity bond. Complainant furnished that bond and the money was transferred to his savings bank account on the same day. Thereafter the complainant filed a complaint seeking direction to the opposite party to pay interest on the amount of Rs.5,46,124/-, which was transferred to his savings bank account on account of the maturity value of the fixed deposit at the rates of term deposit applicable at that time, which, according to him, was 12% per annum.
3. Opposite party contested the complaint and pleaded that the complainant had approached on 27.08.2008 for the first time, after maturity of the deposit, for the payment of money and that since the receipt was not produced by him, he was required to furnish indemnity bond and the money was transferred to his savings bank account. Opposite party denied their liability to pay interest.
4. Learned District Forum, vide impugned order, has allowed the complaint and directed the opposite party to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of the maturity of the deposit, i.e. 12.04.2001, to the date of transfer of the money to his savings bank account and also to pay Rs.25,000/-, as damages and litigation expenses.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
6. In Annexure R I, which complainant submitted to the opposite party on 27.08.2008, for transfer of the maturity amount of fixed deposit to his savings bank account, he himself wrote that he pledged the FDR, in question, with Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner, on 22.04.1996 and for the same, a letter of guarantee had been issued in the sum of Rs.4,96,000/- by the bank. Not only this, he also stated that the FDR had been misplaced. The contents of the aforesaid letter, Annexure R I, show that it was on account of the fixed deposit receipt having been pledged by the complainant with the Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner that he could not seek the payment of the fixed deposit on the date of its maturity.
He probably approached the opposite party only after he liquidated his tax liability to the Excise & Taxation Department.
7. Parties have not placed on record any instructions of the opposite party-bank or of the Reserve Bank of India dealing with a situation, where maturity amount of the fixed deposit is not claimed by the depositor on due date, but is claimed long thereafter. Not only this, even in the pleadings, there is no reference to any instructions or guidelines qua this aspect of the matter. In the absence of instructions or the pleadings relating to instructions or the guidelines, we are left with no alternative but to adjudicate the matter based on common principles of law and equity.
8. Since the money remained with the opposite party after the date of the maturity of the fixed deposit and the opposite party made use of it, it cannot deny its liability to pay interest on the maturity value of the fixed deposit. We are saying so on the principle that no party can unduly enrich itself at the cost of another. However, in the absence of any instructions or guidelines with regard to the rate, at which interest should be payable to the opposite party, we direct that the interest be paid at the savings bank rate prevailing from time to time, right from the date of the maturity of the deposit to the date of the transfer of the money in the savings bank account of the complainant. The order of learned District Forum, directing payment of interest at the rate of 9% per annum and an amount of Rs.25,000/-, by way of compensation and litigation expenses, is set aside. Opposite party is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- on account of litigation expenses.
9. A copy of this order be placed on the record of F.A. No. 357/2014 and its authenticated copy on the record of F.A. No.423/2014.
10. A copy of the order be sent to each of the parties, free of cost, as per Rules.
(Justice Surjit Singh) President (Prem Chauhan) Member (Vijay Pal Khachi) Member January 08, 2015.
DC Dhiman) [1]Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order?