ORDER NO. 4 DT. 21.04.2009

Heard the Appellant in person.  Though notice was served on the sole Respondent, but no one appears on behalf of the Respondent nor any dispute has been raised as regards contention of the Appellant.  It appears that the Forum below has dismissed the proceeding before it on the ground that the complainant had made an Appeal before the Company Law Board for re-payment of maturity amount regarding the same FDR in question and so, a view was taken by the Forum that the case was not maintainable before the Fora. 

We have perused the statements made in the Memo of Appeal, particularly  Para-7 thereof,  which has not been contradicted by the sole Respondent.  From the said recital it appears that the Appellant made a plain application to the Bench Officer of the CLB with a prayer to pass an order on the Respondent Company to repay the Appellant’s fixed deposit amount on compassionate ground.

As the aforesaid application does not appear to have been made under any provisions of the Companies Law, nor it is indicated on behalf of the Respondent that the said application gave rise to a proceeding before the CLB or that the same is still pending and the matter having not been decided by any appropriate Fora, the application made for relief on compassionate ground cannot be treated as a bar to maintain the application before the Consumer Fora.  In above view of law, the impugned order is set aside.  The Appeal is allowed ex parte.  The matter is sent back to the Forum below for disposal of the same in accordance with law.  A copy of this order may be sent down to the Forum below forthwith.