Respondent/complainant had purchased Indira Vikas Patras (IVPs) in the sum of Rs.10,000/-  whose maturity date was 11.10.2002 and the maturity amount was Rs.20,000/-.  Respondent lost the IVPs.  State Commission, following the judgement of this Commission in Ram Nath Mathuria vs. Union of India & Ors. – III(2002)CPJ 22, directed the petitioner to pay the maturity amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant subject to his furnishing the Indemnity Bond.

          Counsel for the petitioner, relying upon a judgement of the Supreme Court in Central Government of India & Ors. vs. Krishnaji Parvetesh Kulkarni – (2006)4 SCC 275 contends that an IVP is akin to an ordinary currency note.  It bears no name of the holder.  Just as a lost currency note cannot be replaced, the question of replacing a lost IVP does not arise.  Rule 7(2) of the Indira Vikas Patra Rules, 1986 makes the position clear that the duplicates of IVPs cannot be issued.

          Point in the said case was different.  We respectfully agree with the view taken by the Supreme Court that duplicate IVPs cannot be issued but the maturity value can be ordered to be paid subject to issuance of the Indemnity Bond.  If any person comes forward claiming the maturity amount by producing the original IVPs, then the petitioner would have the right to recover the same from the respondent on the basis of the Indemnity Bond given by him.  In this process, no loss would be caused to the petitioner.  Petitioner cannot be allowed to enrich itself at the cost of the poor investor, specially when the interest of the petitioner is being fully protected.  Dismissed.