ORDER
B.K. Taimni, Member
1. Petitioner was the complainant before the District Forum.
2. Briefly the facts leading to filing of complaint were that complainant had made a Term Deposit of Rs. 14,718.39 for a period of four months, i.e, for the period 9.2.1959 to 9.6.1959 at a rate of interest 3.75 per cent per annum. After its maturity on 9.6.1959, next time complainant approaches the Bank is only in the year 1987 and formalises this in writing only on 25.11.1988 for payment of FDR amount with interest. Since it did not espouse any response, a complaint was filed before the District Forum on 9.12.1997 who after hearing the parties passed the order on 28.8.1999. Operative part reads as follows :
“The FDR could not be renewed on account of the lapse on the part of the complainant. Therefore, the complainant is not entitled to get any interest till
25.11.1988. However, the complainant becomes entitle for interest at the rate of
Savings Interest with effect from 25.11.1988 till filing of the complaint which
has been filed on 9.12.1977 and thereafter at the rate of prevalent rate regarding FDR 10% p.a. The amount with interest shall be paid to the complainant on or before October 31st, 1999, failing which the opposite parties shall pay compensation to the complainant to the extent of Rs. 5,000/-. The copies of this order be sent for the parties free of costs.”
3. An appeal filed against this order by the petitioner/complainant before the State Commission was dismissed, hence this revision petition by the petitioner/complainant with the main grievance that he is entitled to interest for the period 9.6.1959 to 25.11.1988 as well for which he relies upon the judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court, AIR Punj. & Har. 208, Hindustan Commercial Bank v. Jagtar Singh.
4. We have perused the material on record and heard the arguments of the parties. Basic facts remain undisputed. Respondent Bank had not filed any appeal against the order of the District Forum.
5. The only issue involved is as to period for which the complainant is entitled to interest and at what rate ?
We see that the citation given by the complainant (supra), is not applicable in this case as the facts of the case were different. However, it is not in dispute that the money was available with the Bank which he would have utilised for its purpose. After maturity, at best it became a ‘deposit account’. Bank has enjoyed this money ever since its maturity. We see merit in the contention of the petitioner that he is entitled to interest for the period that money was with the Bank. In our view, maximum that the petitioner is entitled to, is interest at the prevailing rates on a Savings’ account, from time to time worked on simple interest basis, from 10.6.1959 till the date of payment made to the petitioner in compliance with the District Forum’s order. Only to this extent, the order of the District Forum as affirmed by the State Commission, is modified. Bank shall rework the total amount payable on the basis of above direction and pay the balances after adjusting for the amount already paid, if any.
The revision petition is allowed in above terms. No order as to costs.