Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 595
Instituted on : 08.10.2021
Decided on : 29.11.2023
Vicky s/o Sh. Ashok Kumar R/o H.No.308/2, KacchiGarhiKuaMohalla, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Agent, Sahara India-AnkushVidu s/o Sh. Raja R/o KacchiGadhiDadu Wala Mohalla, District Rohtak.
- Bank Manager, Sahara India Parivar, Address: Sahara India Parivar Ganga Palace Complex, Subhash Road, 2nd Floor Rohtak.
- Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited Registered Office: Sahara India Bhawan, 1,Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024 Regd. No.MSCS/CR/333/2010 being A subsidiary Co. of Sahara India Parivar.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,2019.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR.TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.Anurag Malik, Advocate for complainant.
Sh.JasvirKundu, Advocate for opposite parties(defence
struck off vide order dated 06.10.2022)
ORDER
VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are thatthe agent of Sahara India contacted the complainant and told about a scheme of company in which he had to pay Rs6000/- per month for four years and the same will be refunded to the complainant with interest. Accordingly complainant opened an account no.20876700297, membership no.20871700030 dated 25.01.2017. Complainant continuously made payment of instalments upto 2 years and thereafter stopped payment. After completion of 5 years, complainant contacted the opposite parties and they replied that the amount was not received from the company and the same will be refundedto the complainant as and when received from the company. Complainant repeatedly visited to the office of the opposite parties and requested them to disburse the amount alongwith interestbut they did not pay any heed towards the genuine requests of the complainant. The act and conduct of the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to disburse the amount of Rs.300000/- alongwith interest and also to pay Rs.50,000/- on account of harassment and Rs.21,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties appeared but failed to file reply despite availing sufficient opportunities including last opportunity and therefore, defence of opposite parties was struck off vide order dated 06.10.2022 of this Commission. Notice sent to opposite party no.3 through registered post received back served but none appeared on behalf of opposite party no.3 and opposite party no.3 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 24.11.2023 of this Commission.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 and closed his evidence on 01.03.2023. Ld. Counsel for the complainant also tendered amended affidavit Ex.CW1/B, document Ex.C8 and closed his evidence on 17.03.2023.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case it is not disputed that as per scheme of opposite parties placed on record as Ex.C1, complainant was to deposit Rs.6000/- per month for 48 months with the opposite parties. Complainant has also placed on record receipt of payment Ex.C2 to Ex.C7. As per copy of Member Ledger statement Ex.C8, complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.156000/- w.e.f. 25.01.2017 to 11.02.2019 i.e Rs.6000/- per month with the opposite parties. He applied for refund of amount but the alleged amount has not been paid by the opposite partiesto the complainant despite his repeated requests. On the other hand, the opposite parties have not filed any reply and have not contested their case despite availing sufficient opportunities and the defence of opposite parties was struck off. As such it is presumed that opposite parties have nothing to say in the matter and all the allegations leveled by the complainant against the opposite parties regarding not refunding the amount stands proved. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and opposite parties areliable to refund the alleged amount to the complainant.
6. Inview of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allowthe complaint and direct the opposite partiesto pay the amount deposited by the complainant throughentries mentioned in Member Ledger Statement Ex.C8 amounting to Rs.1,56,000/-(Rupees one lakh fifty six thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from dated 11.02.2019 to till its realization and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the party free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
29.11.2023.
..................................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
…………………………………..
TriptiPannu, Member.
………………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member.
