ORDER
P.D. Shenoy, Member
1. The issue involved in this revision petition is whether a Co-operative Society can refuse to refund the maturity amount to the depositors on the grounds of its financial weakness. The simple answer to the question is No.
2. The complainant is a retired employee of Nashik District Co-operartive Bank who has deposited his life long savings of Rs. 2,85,000 with Shree Agrasen Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha –a Co-operative Society (hereinafter be referred as Society) in a monthly income scheme on various dates. Monthly interest and matured deposits are credited to his savings bank account from time-to-time. The society refused to refund the amount transferred to the savings Bank Account on the ground that “his demand is right but the previous Board of Directors did not take any vigorous action for the recover]/ of debt, the liquidity of the Patsanstha has gone down”. In this connection, it is relevant to quote from the written statement of the Society that “the staff and directors have started the vigorous action against the defaulter so that the economical condition of the Patsanstha will be improved infuture and the amount of depositer will be refunded as per the recovery of loans and the amount will be distributed in instalment is expected by staff and director.”
3. The District Forum after hearing the parties allowed the complaint and directed the society to refund the amount of Rs. 2,60,686, along with interest at the decided rates till the date of refund with Rs. 750 as costs.
4. Aggrieved by the order of District Forum the society has filed an appeal which was dismissed summarily by the State Commission.
5. We have heard Mr. Sarad Singhania, learned Advocate for the petitioner who submitted that the society does not deny its liability to repay, but at present its financial position does not enable it to refund the amount as many of its borrowers had defaulted it was also clarified during the hearing that there are no statutory directions from the RBI to the society not to refund the amount to the complainant or similarly placed depositors.
6. In view of the above, we do not see any merit in this revision petition necessitating our intervening under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Dismissed.