NIRMAL LEGA Vs. NATIONWIDE INVESTMENTS PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the petitioner who urged before us that the respondent could not unilaterally appropriate the amount of the FDR without the concurrence of "the complainant/petitioner and in this respect reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in Anumati v. Punjab National. Bank., 2004 4 CPJ 21

(2.) The complainant had taken FDR for Rs.1,00,000 on 5.4.1998 which was renewed from time-to-time. The last renewal was on 5.4.2003 and the same was to mature on 4.4.2004-the maturity amount being Rs.2,12,797 with 11% p.a. Admittedly, the husband of the complainant who was Director in the respondent Company with whom the amount was deposited under the FDR, had taken loan of Rs.1,25,000 on 26.7.1998 for which security of the said FDR was given. The lien of the OP was marked and duly endorsed by the complainant on the original FDR dated 5.4.1998. When the fresh FDR was made, the husband of the complainant took the FDR to take the signatures of the depositor/ complainant, but it was not returned back with the endorsement of the lien. In the meantime, the husband of the complainant had expired. When the complainant applied for the maturity value of the FDR, the OP informed that the loan amount of Rs.1,25,000 taken by the husband of the complainant for which lien had been created against the FDR in question was required to be adjusted against the loan account. The loan account was to the tune of Rs.3,08,918 and, as such, the OP adjusted the same against the FDR maturity value of Rs.2,69,927 and a sum of Rs. 38,941 was waived by the OP. In these circumstances, the complainant approached the District Forum.

(3.) The District Forum directed payment of maturity value of the FDR as also a sum of Rs. 10,000 for physical harassment, mental agony and pain besides cost of Rs.5,000 as litigation expenses. This order was challenged by the OP before the State Commission.