LAWANG T PULGER Vs. ICICI INFOTECH SERVICES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was the complainant before the District Forum.

(2.) Brief facts of the case - as they emerge from the record are that the petitioners who are husband and wife, with a view to purchase 'Safety Bonds' floated by the 1st respondent obtained a D.D. for Rs. 1 lakh drawn from the second respondent in favour of the Ist respondent and deposited with the 2nd respondent to be sent to the 1st respondent. This D.D. was sent by the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent's office in Calcutta along with all the required documents. It is the case of the complainants that they were never issued Safety Bonds while it is the case of the 1st respondent, that since they never received the said D.D. no Safety Bonds could be issued. Ist respondent was willing to issue Safety Bonds provided a new D.D. is sent to them as per condition 15 of the scheme. When this was not happening and since the D.D. Life/validity had expired, they were willing to refund Rs. 1 lakh but upon the petitioner's/complainant's giving an Indemnity Bond. When the complainant saw no progress, neither any satisfactory response nor a complaint came to be filed by him before the District Forum who after hearing the parties passed order in following term-

(3.) Upon an appeal being filed by the 1st respondent, State Commission passed the order, operative part of which reads: "For the aforesaid reasons, the judgment of the Forum is modified to the extent that the complainants would be entitled to get Rs. 1.00 lakh from respondent 3 on the above score. In the event, the amount as aforesaid is not paid within the stipulated period by respondent 3, it would carry interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of default till payment."