IMPORTANT POINTS
1) It does not appear logical that a person would deposit part of money in his Saving Bank Acc. for converting it into Fixed Deposit and withdraw the bal. amt. of Rs.47,000/- for converting into another Fixed Deposit.
2) National Commission has to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it only if the State Commission or Distt. Forum has either failed to exercise their jurisdiction or exercised when the same was not vested in them or exceeded their jurisdiction by acting illegally or with material irregularity.

ORDER (ORAL)

The present Revision Petition, under Section 58 (1) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (for short “the Act”) has been filed by the Complainant against the order dated 18.03.2020 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan Circuit Bench, Udaipur (for short “the State Commission”) in Appeal No.297 of 2013 of the Petitioner which was filed against the order dated 30.10.2013 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-Chittorgarh, Rajasthan (for short “the District Forum”) in his Complaint No.368 of 2012. The Complaint was dismissed by the District Forum. The State Commission vide the impugned order, while dismissing the Appeal, imposed cost of Rs.10,000/-.

2. The Petitioner had filed the Complaint before the District Forum claiming deficiency in service on the part of the Respondent/Opposite Party whereby they had refused to encash the FD which, the Petitioner alleged, had been opened by him by depositing a cash amount of Rs.47,000/- but the same had not been encashed by the Opposite Party while another FD for the same amount which was opened on 04.12.2006 had been encashed.

3. The plea of the Opposite Party/Respondent had been that the Complainant had Saving Bank Account No.51079803043. It was stated that on 03.12.2006, the Complainant did not deposit the amount of Rs.47,000/- as the Bank remained closed. It was submitted that the Complainant only deposited certain cash amount on 04.12.2006 and thereafter, converted an amount of Rs.47,000/- in a Fixed Deposit and that they are ready to credit the maturity amount in the Saving Bank Account of the Complainant. It is denied by the Opposite Party that the Complainant had opened any other Fixed Deposit.

4. Parties led their evidences. After hearing the parties and perusing the relevant record, the District Forum has observed thus:

“5. Dispute between the Complainant and defendants is that two Fixed Deposit Receipts of Rs.47,000/- each were issued on 03.12.2006/04.12.2006 or only one Receipt was issued which was renewed on 14.12.2006 with enhanced rate of interest of 8.5 percent. In fact Complainant has stated that on the above-said date two Fixed Deposit Receipts were prepared and when these were presented at the defendant Bank for payment, he was told that payment of only one receipt can be made with its maturity amount of Rs.71,571/-. According to the defendant Bank Complainant had assured the then Branch Manager Sh. R.K. Modi at the time of renewal that old Fixed Deposit Receipt will be submitted at the Bank but the same was not produced and on the basis of same he is claiming the amount on maturity. According to the defendant Bank, on 14.12.2006 a Circular was received at the Bank from Headquarter, according to which the rate of interest on fixed deposit was increased from 8 percent to 8.50 percent and when this information was given, Complainant requested for the renewal of Fixed Deposit Receipt issued on 04.12.2006 and in accordance with this Fixed Deposit Receipt 025656 was renewed on 14.12.2006 and Receipt No. 025668 was issued.

6. Undoubtedly a mistake has been committed by the Bank and when Receipt No. 025668 was issued, date of its issuance was mentioned as 03.12.2006 with date of maturity as 03.12.2011. Now the question arises that this mistake was bonafide or intentional? In the additional affidavit filed before this Forum by the Complainant it has been mentioned that on 04.12.2006 he took Rs.64,500/- at the Bank on which the then Manager Modi issued one Receipt dated 03.12.2006 with interest at the rate of 8.5 percent and another at the interest at the rate of 8.50 percent, on which Complainant gave his consent. We are unable to understand that when two Fixed Deposit Receipts were issued on 04.12.2006 then how interest at the rate of 8 percent is payable on one and at the rate of 8.5 percent on another. It is also difficult to understand that how a Branch Manager of the Bank can assure the issuance of Fixed Deposit Receipt o