ORDER BY HON’BLE MEMBER- MRS. M. SWAIN:

                                                                                            JUDGMENT

Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.35 of C.P. Act, 2019 seeking following reliefs;

            “Direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.26,120/-along with 12% interest from 30.3.2020 till the date of payment, pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and harassment and Rs.20,000/- towards litigation fees”.

            Brief fact of the case is that the complainant is a permanent resident of the village Rankei, under Tirtol police station and in the District of Jagatsinghpur which comes under this Commission. The complainant being persuaded by the agent of opposite parties invested Rs.10,000/- in “Sahara E Shine” scheme in her name and bond was issued vide certificate No.351004278706 on 31.3.2012 which was matured on 31.3.2020 for sum of Rs.26,120/-. On 03.4.2020 complainant approached the Branch Office at Jagatsinghpur for his maturity money. The Branch Office took the original bond and said that the matter is in process and the complainant would be getting her cheque of due amount in a very short time. But till date in spite of several request and letters opposite parties are not disburse matured amount.

Notice was issued to opposite parties on 19.7.2021 by Regd. Postopposite party No.2 did not appear before this commission and set ex-parte vide order No.9 dated 27.4.2022. The opposite party No.1 submitted his written version on 15.7.2022.

            Questioning on the maintainability of the consumer complaint and denying the allegations made by the complainant, the opposite party No.1 in his written version stated that the complainant case is bad for mis joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties as because the agent has not been made a party in this case. There is an Arbitration Clause in the Agreement. The opposite party stated that the complainant without depositing the relevant documents before the Branch Manager demanded the maturity amount for which they have not disburse the maturity amount.

            Coming to the issue of maintainability this Commission found that one of the places of business of the opposite parties is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission. As the Agent is the paid staff of the opposite parties non joinder of agent is not fatal for opposite parties and they can speak for agent and complainant is not claiming from agent but claiming from opposite parties. The causes of action to file this complaint which arose on dt.01.7.2021 as stated by the complainant is in the circumstance acceptable to us as true and is within the stipulated period of limitation and in spite of presence of arbitration clause if any as stated by the opposite party No.1, as per Civil Appeal No.23512-23513 of 2017 of Hon’ble Supreme Court that “Arbitration Clause on the Agreement does not bar the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora to entertain the Complaint”  for  these reasons the Consumer complaint is maintainable in this Commission. The complainant by depositing money with the opposite party No.1 avails the service, which stands in the footing of service provider thus derives the status of a consumer under the opposite parties as per the relevant provision of the Act.

            Coming to the issue that whether the opposite parties have shown any deficiency in service and/or unfair trade practice towards the complainant, it is found from the record that the complainant had deposited Rs.10,000/-  for the Scheme “Sahara E Shine” scheme on 31.3.2012 and certificates was issued in which maturity amount mentioned as Rs.26,120/- on 31.3.2020 being the date of maturity. But maturity amount has not been made by the concerned opposite party till date, rather contrary to it, the reason what has been stated by the opposite party No.1  was that  complainant without depositing the relevant documents before the Branch Manager demanded the maturity amount for which they did not disburse the maturity amount. So in this circumstances, we are of the considered view that the opposite party No.1 has failed not only in rendering proper service but also has shown negligence which creates deficiency in service on their part. Considering the facts and circumstances and looking into the benevolent nature of the Act, the opposite party No.1 is held liable towards the complaint and hence directed to pay Rs.26,120/- (Rupees twenty six thousand one hundred twenty only) as the total maturity amount for the above discussed “Sahara E Shine” Scheme. We also award cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony, harassment and cost of litigation, which is to be paid within 30 days from the date of receipt  of this order . The consumer complaint is disposed off accordingly.