G.D. Sharma, J. (Oral) 1. Through the medium of this appeal, order dated 3.3.2008, passed by the learned Divisional Consumer Protection Forum Srinagar, (hereinafter to be referred to as the `Forum'), has been challenged. The appeal was filed on 01.05.2008 and as per the office report it is time barred by 25 days. The reason assigned is that the delay was not intentional but permission had to be sought from the higher authorities for filing the same and time got consumed. We have gone through the contents of the impugned order find substance to condone the delay, as the appeal requires to be adjudicated on merits. Hence the application is accepted and the delay is condoned. The appeal be registered in the concerned register. 2. With the assistance of counsel for the parties we have gone through the contents of the impugned order and find that the only controversy is with regard to the compensation which has been awarded by the Forum in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- to the complainant for mental agony and financial loss in two equal shares of Rs. 20,000/- each. Rs. 5000/- has been awarded as litigation charges. There is no necessity of calling the record of the Forum because it is admitted in the impugned order that written complaint was lodged before the Bank authorities on 2.8.2003 regarding the withdrawal of the major portion of the amount deposited in the saving account by committing fraud and fabrication of record. On 11.9.2003 the amount had been wrongfully restored in favour of the predecessor of respondent, who during the pendency of the proceedings before the Forum had expired and substituted by the respondent herein as legal heir. Such a fraudulent withdrawal cannot be defended by the appellant which is a Nationalised Bank and is under the legal obligation in terms of the direction given by the Hon'ble Supreme court, in case of M/S Hyderabad Commercials vs. Indian Bank and others, AIR 1991 SC 247 , to keep the accounts clean and transparent. The Hon'ble Court has held:- "The plea of instruction, justifying transfer of such large amount is an after-thought which does not inspire any credence. The Bank's conduct is reprehensible. The Hon'ble Court has held:- "The plea of instruction, justifying transfer of such large amount is an after-thought which does not inspire any credence. The Bank's conduct is reprehensible. We are constrained to observed that such functioning of a Nationalised Bank is detrimental to public interest and if it follows the practice of transferring money of its customers to other persons account on oral authority, people will loose faith in the credibility of Bank." 3. It is thus established that the house of the Bank was not in order so such a fraud and fabrication of accounts could take place against a senior citizen, who was the consumer. He had to undergo mental trauma and financial loss, for which compensation has been awarded. However, from perusal of the impugned order we find that the direction or payment of interest @ 6% P.A. on the compensation amount is not legally justified and to this extent the appeal is accepted and the impugned order is modified but keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, that a senior citizen, being a consumer, has suffered financially and emotionally and ultimately expired during the pendency of the complaint, we enhance the amount of compensation from Rs. 20,000/- under each head to Rs. 30,000/- under each head. The litigation charges granted by the Forum stand restored. Parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be sent to the Forum for information and necessary action.