24.11.2014

MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY, HON’BLE MEMBER

            The present Appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 19.7.2012 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cooch Behar, in Case No. DF 27/2012, directing the Appellants/Ops to pay to the Respondent/Complainant Rs. 1,162/- being the short-payment of interest within 15 days from the date of the order and also to pay interest on Rs. 17,00,000/- at actual rate without recurrence of short-payment of Rs. 7/- per month per lac, and also to pay litigation cost of Rs. 2,000/- to the Respondent/Complainant within one month from the date of the order.

          Brief facts of the case are that the Respondent/Complainant invested Rs. 27,00,000/- (Rs. 10,00,000/- on 18.7.2011 plus Rs. 15,00,000/- on 16.9.2011 plus Rs. 2,00,000/- on 11.11.2011) in the monthly income scheme of the Appellants/Ops-Bank on the terms of interest payable @ 10% per month.  A few months after such investment when the Respondent/ Complainant checked the Statement of Accounts related to the concerned interest, he noticed that the Appellants/Ops-Bank paid interest at a rate which fell short of Rs. 119.12 per month which would ultimately result in short-payment of interest of Rs. 1,428/- in a year.  Noticing such short-fall the Respondent/Complainant, by  letters dated 5.12.2011 and 24.1.2012, requested the Appellants/Ops-Bank to rectify the short-payment of the interest, but without any success.  With this factual background the Ld. District Forum passed the impugned judgment and order in the manner aforesaid.  Aggrieved by such order the Appellants/Ops carried this Appeal to this Commission.

          The Ld. Advocate for the Appellants/Ops assailing the impugned judgment and order submits that the Ld. District Forum erred in law in allowing the Petition of Complaint by-passing the provisions of Clause (d) of Sub section (1) of Section 102 read with Sub section 4 of Section 102 of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006, the conjoint provisions of which clearly bar the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora in the matter of dispute between “a Cooperative Society and any person having transaction with it”.   It is further contended by the Ld. Advocate that the short-payment of interest arose due to introduction of a new method of calculation of interest, i.e. CBS method, on 23.7.2011 as per RBI guidelines, which was notified in the Notice Board of the Appellants/Ops, and that this new method of calculation was different from the old method of calculation, i.e. TBA method, which remained in force upto 22.7.2011.  The Ld. Advocate concludes that in view of this legal and factual position of the case the impugned judgment and order should be set aside, it being beyond the jurisdiction of the Ld. District Forum.  In support of such contention the Ld. Advocate has referred to a decision of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta, in Contai Cooperative Society Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors., decided on 23.2.2011 in WP 14303(W) of 2009.

          None appears on behalf of the Respondent/Complainant on the date of final hearing, although the Ld. Advocate for the Respondent/Complainant appeared on previous occasions, i.e. on 5.10.12, 22.2.2013 and 12.7.2013.

          However, by the evidence-in-chief filed by the Respondent/ Complainant before the Ld. District Forum, which is available on records, the Respondent/Complainant tried to refute the above submission of the Ld. Advocate for the Appellants/Ops-Bank stating that Sub section (4) of Section 102 of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006 is not applicable in the present case and that the submissions of the Ld. Advocate for the Appellants/Ops-Bank are misleading.  It has also been stated therein that the Appellants/Ops could not discriminate about the rate of interest as applicable to their customers on the plea of CBS or TBA method of calculation of interest.

We have heard both the sides, considered their rival submissions and perused the materials on records.

          The Petition of Complaint and other materials, as brought on records, sufficiently demonstrate that the dispute involved centres round the transaction between a person, as is the present Respondent/Complainant, and a Cooperative Society.  The dispute involved being so, it is squarely covered by Clause (d) of Sub section (1) of Section 102 of the West Bengal Coopeative Societies Act, 2006 which reads as under:

“(d)……………………………………………………………………………between a Cooperative Society and any person having transaction with it….”                

          Therefore, the present case is excluded from the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora as envisaged in the provisions of Sub section (4) of Section 102 of the said Cooperative Societies Act which runs:

“(4) Any Civil Court or any Consumer Dispute Redressal Fora shall not have any jurisdiction to try any dispute as mentioned in Sub section (1)”.

          In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are unable to agree with the conclusion of the Ld. District Forum in the impugned judgment and order which is coram non judice. On the facts and evidence on record the impugned judgment and order is liable to be set aside.

          Consequently, the Appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and order is set aside.  The Petition of Complaint stands dismissed.  No order as to costs.