The Court reaffirmed that banks must honor valid Fixed Deposit receipts unless substantial evidence proves otherwise, upholding consumer protection principles.

1. The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondents as detailed above, under S.21(b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 9.8.2018 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan, Jaipur, (hereinafter referred to as the ˜State Commission'), in First Appeal (FA) No. 282 of 2017 in which order dated 25.1.2017 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bharatpur (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complaint (CC) no 174 of 2010 was challenged, inter alia praying to quash and set aside the order of State Commission.

2. While the Revision Petitioner (hereinafter also referred to as Complainant) was Respondent and the Respondent(s) (hereinafter also referred to as OP) were Appellants in the said FA / 282/2017 before the State Commission, the Revision Petitioner was Complainant and Respondent(s) were OP before the District Commission in the CC No. 174 of 2010. Notice was issued to the Respondents on 21.12.2018. Petitioner filed Written Arguments / Synopsis on 27.3.2023 Respondents did not file written synopsis despite orders dated 26.4.2023 and 19.6.2023.

3. Brief facts of the case, as emerged from the RP, Order of the State Commission, Order of the District Commission and other case records are that:

The complainant opened an account (Account No. 5104982/117) with OP bank and deposited an initial sum of Rs. 50,000. The complainant also expressed the intention to invest an additional Rs. 50,000 as a Fixed Deposit (FD). OP responded by issuing an FD Certificate (No. CB / A107145) and allotted Account No. 81034205096 for the proposed FD transaction. Upon the maturity of the FD, the complainant duly requested the withdrawal of the matured amount. OP assigned one of its employees, Sh. GS Chouhan, to facilitate the withdrawal process. Subsequently, the complainant signed the withdrawal form as per the bank's instructions. To the complainant's dismay, despite the requested withdrawal, OP did not disburse the matured amount within the stipulated time. Instead, they surprisingly chose to invalidate the FD certificate, rendering it null and void. The OP informed the complainant of a distressing situation involving a significant amount of money and alleged that former employees, Sh. Bhatt and Cashier Rajendra, were involved in the fraudulent activity. Moreover, OP disclosed the ongoing investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into this matter. In an effort to ascertain the veracity of the situation, the complainant cross - checked the FD information on the official website of OP bank and thereafter submitted a formal written complaint, expressing grave apprehensions and demanding necessary actions. Unfortunately, the OP neglected the complaint, compelling the complainant to resort to legal measures by lodging a formal complaint before the Learned District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum in Bharatpur, Rajasthan.

4. Vide Order dated 25.1.2017 in the CC No. 174 of 2010 the District Commission has directed the OP bank to pay the matured FD amount of Rs. 54,654 along with 9% interest p.a. against FDR No. CB / A107145 and to pay Rs 5,000 for mental agony and costs of the case. Aggrieved by the said Order dated 25.1.2017 of District Commission, Respondent appealed in State Commission and the State Commission vide order dated 9.8.2018 in FA No. 282 of 2017 has reversed the order of District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Bharatpur, Rajasthan and dismissed the case.

5. Petitioner has challenged the said Order da