BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PONDICHERRY

C.C.No.10/2015

Dated this the 2^nd day of April 2015.

1. M. Natesan @ Selvam, S/o.Manickam

2. N. Amudha, W/o.Natesan @ Selvam

Both are residing at No.1, Main Road, Keezhamanai

Village, Neravy Commune Panchayat, Karaikal District

Munsifi.                                                                                             …. Complainants

Vs.

1.  The Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Keezhamanai Branch

     Uzhipathu Village, Neravy Commune Panchayat and Kariakal

     District Munsifi.

2.  The Deputy General Manager, Canara Bank, Circle Office

     City Town No.1, Royal Road, Cantonment,

     Tiruchirapalli -620 001.                                                             .... Opposite Parties

BEFORE:

            THIRU.A.ASOKAN, B.A., B.L.,

            PRESIDENT 

Tmt. PVR. DHANALAKSHMI, B.A.,B.L.,

           MEMBER

FOR THE COMPLAINANT                       :  Thiru.R.Vetriselvan, Advocate

FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:OP.1 : 

                                                               OP.2 :  Thiru.M.V.Sundaramoorthy, Advocate

O R  D  E  R

            This is a complaint filed u/s.12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for :

1. Directing the opposite parties bank to return all the original title deeds deposited by the complainants with the opposite parties bank, to them
2. Directing the opposite parties to pay the complainants a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the hardship exerted on the complainants by the opposite parties bank, for their mental hardship, ordeal and depression suffered by them, as the opposite parties bank had retained the complainants' original documents without rendering any services to them, which is deficiency in service
3. Directing the opposite parties to pay the compensation amount with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of complaint to the date of actual realisation of the compensation amount
4. Directing the opposite parties bank to pay the cost of this complaint.

Today, the complaint was called. Complainant and the opposite parties called absent and counsel absent.  Perused the memo filed by the complainant.  The complainant submits that they had settled the dispute of this complaint among themselves out of court.  Therefore the complainants are not willing to continue with this complaint and are not pressing this complaint with full satisfaction and pray to dismiss the complaint as not pressed without cost.

In view of the memo, this complaint is hereby dismissed, no cost.

Dated this the 2^nd day of April 2015.

1.  ASOKAN)

PRESIDENT

(PVR. DHANALAKSHMI)

MEMBER