Orissa

Sambalpur

CC/75/2021

Smt. Subrata Panigrahi - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. The Branch Manager Sahara India Sambalpur Branch - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.A.Panigrahi & Associates

20 Sep 2022

ORDER

PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Case No- 75/2021

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,                                          

Smt. Subrata Panigrahi,

S/o- Anoop Kumar Panigrahi, house wife

R/o-Saraswati Enclave. Qtr. No.H-5,

Near City Railway Station, Sambalpur Town,

Po/Ps-Ainthapali, Dist-Sambalpur-768004, Odisha                           ...………..Complainant

                        Versus

 

1. The Branch Manager

Sahara India Sambalpur Branch, At-Ainthapali

Po-Budharaja, Ps-Ainthapali Dist-Sambalpur-768004, Odisha

 

2. The Regional Manager, Sahara Regional Office,

Sambalpur, At-Ainthapali,Po-Budharaja

Dist-Sambalpur-768004,Odisha.

 

3. Mr.Subrat Ray, Managing worker cum Chairman,

Sahara India Parivar, Sahara India tower,

Kapoorthala Complex, Lucknow-226024,U.P.          …………...Opp.Party

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant    :-Sri Antaryami Panigrahi,Adv,& Associates
2. For the O.Ps.                   :-Sri.Mahendra Pratap Singh, Advocate & Associates

 

DATE OF HEARING : 17.08.2022, DATE OF JUDGEMENT : 20.09.2022

   Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT,

1.   `The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant is a cerificate holder of the O.Ps. having A/C No. 467005100169, 467005100170, 467005100171, 351005449362 and 351005449361 and deposited Rs. 67,550/-, Rs. 22,550/-,  Rs.45,050/-, Rs.19,000 and Rs. 19,000/- on dated 29.09.2018, and 25.05.2012 respectively as fixed deposit. The accounts matured on 29.09.2021, and 25.05.2020 respectively. After repeated request and submission of prescribed forms also the O.Ps did not pay the maturity amount. A  notice was given on 28.06.2021 but no any reply given by the O.Ps . Being harassed filed the complaint.

 

2.   The case of the O.Ps. is that the O.Ps. are a multistate Co-op. Society under the Multi-state Co.op. Societies Act, 2002 and as contributed his share he is the owner of the society and not a ‘Consumer’. This Commission has no jurisdiction as there is no deficiency in service of the O.P.  and special remedies are available under section 84 of the said Act and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. Further O.Ps files decision of Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi, in M/s Anjana Abraham Chembethil Vr Managing Director, The Koothattukulam Farmers Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.  reported (2013) 4 CPJ 333 (NC)

3.   After perusal of the documents filed by the parties, it is observed that the Complainant invested Rs. 67,550/- on 29.09.2018 vide certificate number. 457005100169, Rs.22,550/- on 29.09.2018 vide certificate No.467005100170, Rs.45,050/- on 29.09.2018 vide certificate No.467005100171,Rs.19,000/- 0n 25.05.2012 vide certificate No. 351005449362 and Rs. 19,000/- on 25.05.2012 against certificate No. 351005449361of the O.P. The maturity date are 29.09.2021, and 25.5.2020. Basing on the pleading of the parties, the following issues are framed:

103606587.  

1.) Whether the Complainant is not a consumer of the O.Ps?

2.) Whether this complaint is not maintainable in view of special provision under the Multi-state Co-operative Societies Act, 2002.

3.) Whether the O.Ps. are deficient in providing service?

4.) What relief the Complainant is entitled to get?

Issue No. 1 Whether the Complainant is not a consumer of the O.Ps?

            The Co-operative Organization registered under the Multi-State Co-operative societies Act, 2002 based on principal of Co-operation. The organization is based on members contribution and the members are having special rights, obligations, privileges and duties to-wards the co-operative societies. For registration purpose of the Co-op. Societies and to stand up a society members are required. This is the one side of the organization. The other side of the organization is that the business activities run by he Co-operatives are the investment made by the member. The Co-operative are profit-making organization and through the investment earns profit from business and get the entity of a business organization.

            Under the veil of membership the O.Ps. are doing Banking business and earning profit. As in investor, the members are investing money and re investing the said amount the O.Ps. are giving the maturity value which includes interest and not dividend. As a financial institution, the O.Ps. are taking benefit from the customer, entered in to agreement to pay maturity value of Rs. 1,54,428/- against Rs67,550/-  Rs. 51,042/- against Rs. 22,550/-, Rs.1,06,868/- against Rs. 45,050/-, Rs.49,628/- against Rs. 19,000 and Rs. 49,628/- against Rs. 19,000/- It is purely a banking business and the Complainant is a ‘customer’ and ‘Consumer’ of the O.Ps.

            Accordingly, the issue is answered against the O.Ps.

 

 

Issue No.2 Whether this complaint is not maintainable in view of special provision under the Multi-state Co-operative Societies Act, 2002.

            In the Multi-state Co-operatives Societies Act, 2002 Special Provision of dispute resolution is provided u/s 84 of the Act. relating to constitution, management or business of the Society. Nowhere in the Act any provision is there that consumer can not go beyond the said Act. The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is a special beneficial legislation for the welfare of the Consumers and to protect their interest. In addition to the Multi-State Co-operatives Act, 2002 the consumer sort for alternative remedy and there is no bar to sort Redressal before this Commission. Accordingly, as an alternative mode as no any arbitration has been preferred by the parties, this Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

            Issue is answered accordingly.

Issue No.3  Whether the O.Ps. is deficient in providing service?

            The O.P. agreed to pay Rs. 1,54,498/- on 29.09.2021 against certificate No. 467005100169, Rs. 51,042/- on 29.09.2021 against certificate No. 467005100170, Rs.1,06,868 on 29.09.2021 against certificate No.467005100171,Rs. 49,628/-0n 25.05.2022 against certificate No. 351005449362 and Rs. 49,628/- on 25.05.2020 against certificate No. 351005449361 to the Complainant but failed to pay. Hard earnings of the Complainant when blocked, not paid in time, after legal notice dated 28.06.2021 also remained silent, this complaint was preferred. The O.Ps harassed the Complainant and compelled to sort Redressal before the Commission. This amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and violation of contract.

            Issue is answered against the O.Ps.

Issue No.4 What relief the Complainant is entitled to get?

               The Complainant is entitled for the relief as claimed for.

               Accordingly, it is ordered:

ORDER

The Complaint is allowed on contest. The O.Ps are directed to pay the maturity value of fixed deposit Rs.1,54,498/- + Rs. 51,042/- + Rs1,06,868/- +Rs. 49,628/- + Rs. 49,628/- total Rs. 4,11,664/- along with 7% interest P.A. w.e.f  date of maturity i.e 29.09.2021, and 25.05.2020 respectively within one month of this order to the Complainant, failing which the amount will carry 12% P.A. from the  date of maturity of the certificate till realisation.

            Further the Ops. are directed to pay compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to-wards harassment and mental agony. In case of non-payment within one month the amount will also carry 12% interest P.A. till realisation.

            Order pronounced on this 20^th  day of September 2022.

            Supply free copies to the parties.