ORDER (Per: Justice B.C. Kandpal, President These two appeals arise out of the order dated 14.06.2007 passed by the District Forum, Nainital in consumer complaint No. 147 of 2005. By the order impugned, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the opposite party – bank to pay sum of Rs. 28,918/- to the complainant together with interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the consumer complaint till payment; Rs. 10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs. 1,500/- towards litigation expenses. Feeling dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the District Forum, the complainant has filed First Appeal No. 235 of 2007 for enhancement and whereas assailing the legality and propriety of the impugned judgment and order passed by the District Forum, the opposite party – bank has filed First Appeal No. 350 of 2007. Since both the appeals arise out of the same judgment and order, therefore, these are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that in the month of June, 2003, the complainant had got a truck financed from the opposite party – bank. The complainant is having loan account No. 100001317115 with the bank. As per the terms of the loan, the complainant had to pay monthly installments of Rs. 14,681/- each till June, 2006. Till 01.11.2004, the complainant deposited the regular installments, but on account of some family problem, he could not deposit four installments for the period from December, 2004 to March, 2005. In the month of March, 2005, the bank repossessed the vehicle. In April, 2005, the complainant paid sum of Rs. 60,000/- in cash to the bank and also deposited cheque of Rs. 23,000/- and also paid sum of Rs. 14,681/- through banker’s cheque in June, 2005. In July, 2005, the vehicle was again repossessed by the bank, which caused loss of Rs. 40,000/- to the complainant. Vide letter dated 16.07.2005, the complainant asked the bank to supply the statement of account, but to no avail. On 19.07.2005, the complainant deposited sum of Rs. 2,94,750/- with the bank and thereafter the bank released the vehicle. The complainant has alleged that the bank has charged excess amount of Rs. 43,756/- from him and alleging deficiency in service on the part of the bank, he filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Nainital. 3. On 19.07.2005, the complainant deposited sum of Rs. 2,94,750/- with the bank and thereafter the bank released the vehicle. The complainant has alleged that the bank has charged excess amount of Rs. 43,756/- from him and alleging deficiency in service on the part of the bank, he filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Nainital. 3. The opposite party – bank filed written statement before the District Forum and pleaded that on deposit of Rs. 2,94,750/- by the complainant on 19.07.2005, the vehicle was released; that no extra amount has been charged from the complainant and that there is no deficiency in service on their part. 4. The District Forum, on an appreciation of the material on record, allowed the consumer complaint vide impugned order dated 14.06.2007 in the above terms. Against the said order, both the parties have filed the present appeals, as stated above. 5. None appeared on behalf of the complainant on the date of arguments. We have heard the learned counsel for the bank and have also perused the record. We have also considered the written arguments dated 22.12.2011 filed by the learned counsel for the complainant (Paper Nos. 57 to 59 on the record of First Appeal No. 235 of 2007). The learned counsel for the complainant has also moved an application dated 16.04.2013 (Paper No. 27 on the record of First Appeal No. 350 of 2007), stating therein that he has filed the written arguments in the matter and after considering the same, the appeals be decided. 6. The bank has advanced loan of Rs. 4,30,000/- to the complainant and the same was to be repaid by the complainant in 35 installments of Rs. 14,681/- each, totaling Rs. 5,13,835/-. The complainant has alleged that upto 30.05.2005, the bank has realized a sum of Rs. 5,34,183/- from him including penalty and other charges and he has also filed the receipts with regard thereto before the District Forum. This way, the bank has realized excess amount of Rs. 43,756/- from the complainant. The bank has alleged that penalty of Rs. 12,655/- was recovered from the complainant, whereas he has calculated the penalty amount as Rs. 4,535/-. 5,34,183/- from him including penalty and other charges and he has also filed the receipts with regard thereto before the District Forum. This way, the bank has realized excess amount of Rs. 43,756/- from the complainant. The bank has alleged that penalty of Rs. 12,655/- was recovered from the complainant, whereas he has calculated the penalty amount as Rs. 4,535/-. The District Forum has considered all the aspects of the matter and after considering the interest chart and the amount charged by the bank towards penalty, parking charges, repossession charges and valuation charges, came to the conclusion that the bank has realized an excess amount of Rs. 28,918/- from the complainant. We do not find anything on record to differ with the said finding recorded by the District Forum and thus the District Forum has rightly held that the bank has made deficiency in service and rightly directed the bank to pay sum of Rs. 28,918/- to the complainant together with interest. However, we are of the view that the interest awarded by the District Forum @ 9% p.a. is on the higher side and in our considered opinion, the same need to be reduced to 7% p.a. Since the complainant is held entitled to interest, therefore, there is no question of awarding separate compensation towards mental agony and, therefore, the award of Rs. 10,000/- towards mental agony is to be set aside. The litigation expenses of Rs. 1,500/- awarded by the District Forum are perfectly justified. Thus, the appeal filed by the bank is to be partly allowed and the order impugned is to be modified accordingly. Since we are modifying the impugned order passed by the District Forum and are reducing the award amount, therefore, there is no question of enhancing the compensation and the appeal filed by the complainant for enhancement is liable to be dismissed. 7. For the reasons aforesaid, First Appeal No. 350 of 2007 is partly allowed. Order impugned dated 14.06.2007 passed by the District Forum is modified and the bank is directed to pay sum of Rs. 28,918/- to the complainant together with interest @7% p.a. from the date of filing of the consumer complaint till payment and Rs. 1,500/- towards litigation expenses, as awarded by the District Forum. First Appeal No. 235 of 2007 is dismissed. Costs of the appeals made easy. 8. 28,918/- to the complainant together with interest @7% p.a. from the date of filing of the consumer complaint till payment and Rs. 1,500/- towards litigation expenses, as awarded by the District Forum. First Appeal No. 235 of 2007 is dismissed. Costs of the appeals made easy. 8. Let the copy of the order be kept on the record of First Appeal No. 350 of 2007.