JUDGMENT - W.M. SAMBRE, President :---The grievance of the appellant is that he has deposited the money with the respondent society on the assurance that loan will be sanctioned. In-spite of repeated requests, no loan has been sanctioned to him. The amount was deposited in the name of Shobha Mahajan, Dilip L. Ghure and Surendra L. Manajan. This contention of the appellant was duly considered by the District Forum. After hearing both the sides, the District Forum his come to the conclusion that there was no privity of contract between the parties. Noting has been brought on record that there was an assurance from the respondent society to grant the loan in favour of appellant, and therefore, the complaint came to be dismissed. Against which this appeal has been filed. 2. Mr. Surendra L. Mahajan appeared before us in person and narrated all the facts of the case. Even after hearing Mr. Surendra L. Mahajan, it has not been clarified that there was any privity of contract between the parties to grant loan after depositing the amount. Considering the fact, the District Forum in our view is right in rejecting the claim of the complainant, as regards the deposited amount with the respondent society of Dilip Ghure Shobha S. Mahajan. The appellant can approach the respondent society for return of his deposited amount and the respondent society is bound to pay the deposited amount as per the provisions of rule or the society. With these direction, this appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs. *****