STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. BHAGIRATHI BUILDERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 3.3.2008 passed by the District Forum, Tehri Garhwal allowing the Consumer Complaint No. 16/2007 and directing the opposite parties to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 4,63,000 as interest and Rs. 10,000 towards compensation and cost of litigation within a month from the date of the order failing which the opposite parties were also held liable to pay an interest @ 10% per annum till the actual date of payment.

(2.) THE facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant M/s. Bhagirathi Builders had deposited an amount of Rs. 2,33,000 in a fixed deposit account with the State Bank of India, Bhagirathipuram Branch, New Tehri - opposite party No. 1 for the period from 13.1.1995 to 13.1.1996, i.e., for one year on an interest rate of 10% per annum. Thus, the FDR (Fixed Deposit Receipt) was to be presented on or after 13.1.1996 for either encashment or its renewal for a further period. The complainant could not do so because the said FDR was deposited with T.H.D.C. (Tehri Hydro Development Corporation Ltd.) as security. The T.H.D.C. released it in September, 2006. The complainant went to the Bank in the last week of September, 2006 and presented the FDR with the request that the maturity amount (the principal amount and interest accrued thereon @ 10% per annum) be credited in his A/c No. 01090031207. The Bank - opposite party No. 1, however, credited the principal amount and interest @ 10% per annum for the period of 13.1.1995 to 13.1.1996 in complainant's account on 10.10.2006. The allegation made by the complainant against the opposite parties is that the Bank kept the principal amount for about 10 years and 8 months and utilised it, but the Bank did not pay interest for this period. Thus, alleging deficiency on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Tehri Garhwal. The District Forum, Tehri Garhwal, after an appreciation of the facts of the case, allowed the complaint vide its order dated 3.3.2008 and directed the opposite parties to pay the interest amount, cost of litigation and compensation as stated above. Aggrieved by the order, the opposite parties have filed this appeal.

(3.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.