THOMAS GEORGE Vs. ALLAHABAD BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This complaint is filed under Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking a direction to the opposite party to release the FCNR deposit amounts retained by the opposite party. The allegations in the complaint are as follows : the complainants are husband and wife and they are maintaining the above deposits. It got matured on April, 1994. However, me opposite party renewed the deposit for another 3 years without the authority of the complainant. This fact was also not intimated to the complainant. The complainants wanted to take back the amount by way of premature closing as they were in urgent need of money for investing in various business activities. They instructed the opposite party to release the money to the Current Account maintained in the Canara Bank, Palarivattom. The complainants also alleged that the Canara Bank also gave instruction for transfer. But those requests did not evoke any response. The complainants gave written instructions on 23.8.1996; still nothing was done. The complainant alleged that this would amount to deficiency in service.

(2.) A version was filed admitting the deposit. However, it was contended that they are renewed by the opposite party as per the oral request of the complainant for a period of three years which enabled the complainants to get the interests. It is further contended that T. Nagar Branch filed O. S.13434/96 against M/s. Air Asiatic Ltd, and the first complainant for recovery of Rs.4,93,967/- together with interest at the rate of 22.75%. That was filed for recovery of amounts outstanding in the Over Draft Account of M/s. Air Asiatic Ltd. which was allowed at the request/ guarantee of the first complainant who at the relevant time was the Chairman of a M/s. Air Asiatic Ltd. Therefore the Bank is entitled to exercise general lien over the deposits aforesaid. To a lawyer's notice dated 30.2.1996 issued on behalf of the complainant a reply dated 15.3.1997 was served stating true faits. In these circumstances the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) The following points were arise for consideration : (i) Whether the opposite party has committed any deficiency (ii) Whether the opposite party has got a lien over the deposits in question (iii) What is the relief, if any, to which the complainant is entitled (iv) What is the order of costs