STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA Vs. CHANDRAKANT MULJIBHAI SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS these two revision petitions arise out of a common order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Maharashtra dated 7th March, 2008 in FA No. 1488 of 2000 and FA No. 1489 of 2000 and as both these revisionpetitions involve same questions of law and facts, we propose to dispose of both these revision petitions by a common order.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are as follows: Shri Chandrakant Muljibhai Shah had opened a Public Provident Fund Account (in short PPF) at Bank of Saurashtra at Sundernagar Branch, Gujarat, (in short the 'Bank') which was transferred to Fort Branch, Mumbai. During the year 1993, he had deposited a sum of Rs. 50 lakh in the PPF Account in instalments from 28.5.1993 to 5.11.1993. He alleged that the bank officials had given him an assurance that he would get interest @ 12% per annum and the interest would be tax -free. Complainant through a letter dated 21.12.1993 requested the bank to refund the amount of Rs. 49,40,000 with interest @ 12% per annum. The bank refunded the amount without interest in the first week of March 1994. Complainant claimed that he is entitled to interest @ 12% per annum which was lying with the Bank from 28.7.1993 to 24.2.1994. As the bank did not concede to his request, he filed a Consumer Complaint No. 86 of 1996 before the District Forum, South Mumbai.

(3.) SIMILARLY Mrs. Savitaben Shah wife of Shri Chandrakant Muljibhai Shah had also deposited Rs. 3,60,000 in instalments in her account during the year 1993, and her request for grant of interest @ 12% per annum was not conceded by the Bank, hence, she also filed a Consumer Complaint No. 87 of 1996.