M. THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The opposite parties are the appellants
(2.) The complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.1 lakh, with the1st opposite party financial institution on 17.11.99, under receipts No.311 and 312, for 5 years, wherein the opposite parties have agreed to pay interest @ 24% p.a. At the request of the complainant, on 17.12.2001, they have returned back a sum of Rs.25000/-, leaving the balance of Rs.75000/- with them. The opposite parties have also paid interest upto 17.12.2001. At request of the opposite parties, the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.1400/- as municipal tax, which is to be deducted from the interest, payable by the opposite parties, since property tax was paid for the property owned by the opposite parties. For the period 9.6.2003 to 9.1.2006, a sum of Rs.41,800/- has to be paid by the opposite parties, as interest. Despite, demand made by the complainant, the opposite parties failed to pay the remaining deposit amount, alongwith stipulated interest, which should be construed as deficiency in service. Issuance of letters also failed to recover the amount, hence, a complaint has been filed, seeking direction against the opposite parties, for the refund of Rs.75000/-, with interest from 17.3.2004, till the date of realization, after deducting the interest already paid, in addition to a sum of Rs.50000/- as compensation, for mental agony etc.
(3.) The opposite parties, admitting the deposit made by the complainant, would contend, that the deposits were made only for one year, and therefore the allegation that the deposits were made for 5 years, is incorrect and if at all, the deposit receipts should have been materially altered. The amount payable towards receipt Nos.311 and 312, were paid and discharged, and as such no amount is due to the complainant and that since the opposite parties have not committed any deficiency, they are not liable to pay any amount, much less the amount claimed in the complaint.;