IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2010 / 17TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 10505 of 2010(K) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- GEORGE VARGHESE, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O. P.V. GEORGE, RESIDING AT VELIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERIKKADU KARA, PUTHUPPALLY VILLAGE, PUTHUPPALLY.P.O, KOTTAYAM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.MANJU ANTONEY, SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR(CHERTHALA). RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. MUPPAINAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., VADAVUMCHAL, WAYANAD REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, UNIT INSPECTOR, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OFFICE, WAYANAD. 2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), KALPEETTA, WAYANAD. 3. ASST. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), KALPETTA, WAYANAD. 4. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT CO-OPERATION (C) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 5. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.E.C.BINEESH, SMT.M.B.SHYNI. R2 TO R5 BY SR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.S.MUHAMMED HASHIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 10505 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner and his wife Nirmala George, had made a Fixed Deposit of Rs.2,00,000/- with the first respondent Bank on 10.10.2000. The petitioner was offered 13% interest and the Fixed Deposit was to mature on 10.11.2005. The complaint of the petitioner is that though the Fixed Deposit had matured, the maturity value of the deposit has not been paid to the petitioner, till date. It is submitted that the petitioner had filed a representation dated 12.10.2001 before the third respondent, as evidenced by Ext.P2. The petitioner had also submitted representations to the Chief Minister. The petitioner received a reply to the same directing him to approach the second respondent. Though the petitioner had submitted Ext.P5 application to the second respondent, requesting him to disburse the amount and interest covered by Ext.P1, no amount has been paid till date. The petitioner therefore seeks appropriate directions for the payment of his Fixed Deposit amount. Wpc 10505/2010 2 2. Though notice in this case was ordered and the respondents have been served, they have not appeared. 3. I have heard the learned Senior Government Pleader. 4. Ext.P1 is a copy of the Fixed Deposit receipt issued by the first respondent Bank. The receipt also shows that the period mentioned therein has already expired. Therefore, the first respondent was duty bound to have returned the amount covered by Ext.P1 with interest to the petitioner, within a reasonable time. The omission to do so is absolutely without any justification. The counsel for the petitioner places reliance on Ext.P6 judgment of this court by which, relief has been granted in similar circumstances by directing the Joint Registrar to ensure that the amount is returned to the depositor. I see no grounds to deny the said relief to the petitioner herein. 5. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to see that the first respondent Society pays the money due to the petitioners remaining in Fixed Deposit, together with the interest accrued thereon, as expeditiously as possible Wpc 10505/2010 3 and at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk