M. THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The opposite parties are the appellants.
(2.) The complainants father by name Sandanam, deposited a sum of Rs.10000/-, in the 1st opposite party bank on 26.12.1992, who died on 5.4.1993, leaving the complainant and others, as his legal heirs. Though the father had nominated one Aarumugam as nominee, in the deposit, the nominee has given no objection letter to the legal heirs of Sandanam, to receive the amount. The complainants father also had borrowed a sum of Rs.1000/-, pledging the security deposit. After the death of the father, producing necessary documents, though the complainant had requested the opposite party, to pay the balance, deducting the loan amount with interest, the opposite party failed to do so, causing mental agony, harassing the complainant, which should be construed as deficiency in service. Hence seeking direction for the refund of the deposit amount, as well a sum of Rs.2 lakhs, towards compensation for mental agony, the case has been filed.
(3.) The opposite parties/appellants, not challenging the deposit made by the father of the complainant, would contend, that the 1st opposite party bank, was dissolved, appointing a liquidator, viz. 2nd opposite party (who has been impleaded subsequently), that if at all the complainant ought to have approached the liquidator, who had taken over the assets of the 1st opposite party, from whom alone, if at all the complainant is entitled to any amount, on the basis of pro-rata, and that as such there was no deficiency in service, thereby praying for the dismissal of the complainant.;