M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The opposite parties are the appellants.
(2.) The complainant/respondent, had deposited a sum of Rs.1 lakh, in two Fixed Deposit Receipts, each for Rs.50000/-, on 21.5.2002, which was later renewed, after maturity. The 1st opposite party, though paid interest for two years, originally, thereafter failed to pay, not only the interest, but also the maturity amount on 21.11.2004. The complainant having approached the 2nd opposite party, as well as the opposite parties 3 and 4 also, failed to realize the amount, resulting issuance of notice, for which there was no proper reply. Hence the claim.
(3.) The opposite parties, denying the deposits, branding them as forgery, opposed the claim, on the grounds, that the then secretary, by name Mariappan, has forged the signature of the Special Officer, committed misappropriation, for which a criminal case has been filed, pending, that the Fixed Deposit amounts, were not brought into account of the bank, and therefore the non-return of the maturity amount, cannot be construed as deficiency in service, thereby prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.;