IMPORTANT POINT
The banking institutes are traced out on the same day or maximum within a month when the balancing of books is done or at the time of annual audit.

R. K. Batta, Presiding Member—The complainant had approached District Forum on account of the opposite party Bank namely, the petitioner in this revision, adjusting Rs.1,00,000 alleged to have been paid in excess that what was due. The same was sought to be adjusted against Special Term Deposit Account No. 0129-2005572. The District Forum vide order dated 10.8.2006 held that the matter required elaborate evidence and going into the account in order to determine as to whether two FDRs were issued against single deposit by mistake and whether payment of both the FDRs was made to the complainant and that the matter could not be decided by filing mere affidavits. The Consumer Forum, therefore, held that the matter can be thrashed in the Civil Court as a result of which, the complainant was asked to approach to the Civil Court. Likewise, it was observed that the opposite party may also approach the Civil Court for having made double payment. The said order was challenged by the complainant before the State Commission.

2. The State Commission allowed the complaint after accepting the submissions made by counsel for the appellant to the effect that the Bank could not withhold the amount of Special Term Deposit Account No. 0129- 2005572 for Rs. 1,00,000 on the ground that the Bank had issued two special term deposit receipts given for renewal on 21.11.2001 and payment had been made by mistake on 2.8.03. The appellant had denied double payment. The State Commission held that:

“We find force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. There is nothing on the record to show that the amount has been paid to the complainant twice. In the banking system mistakes are traced out on the same day or maximum within one month when the balancing of books is done or at the time of annual audit. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case we are of the view that there is certainly a deficiency in service on the part of the respondent Bank. Accordingly, this appeal is accepted and the respondent Bank is directed to pay to the complainant the amount of Rs. 1,00,000 with 9% per annum interest which include compensation from the date of maturity till payment. Rs. 5000 are awarded as costs of litigation. However, the respondent Bank is at liberty to recover the amount in the civil court, if any.”

3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the complainant who appeared in person. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Bank had filed an affidavit stating that one FDR was renewed twice and the renewal on the second occasion was by mistake.

4. The payment in respect of the second FDR which is said to have been issued by mistake by the Bank was made way back on 2.8.2003. The Bank had sent registered letter after about 2 years on 14.3.2005 demanding the payment of Rs.1,00,000 and by subsequent letter dated 16.3.05, debited/recovered the said amount of Rs.1,00,000 against Special Term Deposit Account No. 0129-2005572. In these circumstances, obviously the petitioner could not have adjusted the said amount of Rs.1,00,000 against the term deposit of the complainant. Prima facie, no acceptable evidence was produced to prove that the renewal of the FDR on second occasion was by mistake or that double payment was made. Even assuming that double payment was made, the Bank could not unilaterally adjust or debit the said amount against any fixed deposit of the complainant and for recovery of the same Bank was required to file civil suit. However, on the material on record the Bank could not have adjusted the said amount of Rs.1,00,000, said to have been paid by mistake, against another Special Term Deposit of the complainant without establishing its claim through the Civil Court. The Bank, therefore, was not justified in adjusting the said amount against the Special Term Deposit of the complainant. The State Commission has rightly pointed out that the banking mistakes are traced out on the same day or maxi