OFFICE OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KANDHAMAL,PHULBANI
C.C.Case No. 05-2021
Shreepali Pradhan
D/o- Gunanidhi pradhan
At- Housing Board Colony,
Qtrs No.-L-II/39,Kendupadar,
PO/PS- Phulbani town
Dist- Kandhamal ………………..Petitioner
Versus
- Brach Manager,
Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.
Sahara India, Anand Bazar, Phulbani
Po/PS- Phulbai town
Dist- Kandhamal
- Sector Manager,
Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.
Sahara India, Anand Bazar, Phulbani
Po/PS- Phulbani Town
Dist- Kandhamal …………….Opp.parties
Present: Sri Purna Chandra Mishra, President,
Sri Sudhakar Senapothi, Member
Counsels: For the complainant: Self
For the Opp. Parties: None (Exparte)
Date of hearing argument: 20.04.2022
Date of order: 21.04.2022
J U D G M E N T
Sri Sudhakar Senapothi, Member
In the matter of an application U/ s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 filed by the complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opp. Parties for not paying maturity amount of the petitioner after its maturity date.
1. Brief fact of the case is that the petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs, 19,000/- on 31.12.2011 for a period of 96 months vide receipt no.80095338852 (2) Rs.18,000/- vide receipt No. 80095338853 for a period of 96 Months and (3) Rs.19,000/- vide receipt no.80095338854 for a period of 96 months in SAHARA CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED under the scheme of SAHARA E.SHINE The Opp.parties have issued three numbers of receipts to the petitioner with maturity value of receipt no (1) Rs. 49,628/- receipt no (2) Rs. 47,016/-and receipt no (3) 49,628/- respectively for a period of 96 month, date of maturity on 31.12.2019. After date of maturity on 31.12.2019, the complainant had made several approaches to the office of the OP no. 1 & 2 to release of his maturity amount. But Opp.parties did not release the maturity amount. It is alleged that due to non-release of the maturity amount duly the complainant suffered from mental agony and also suffered from financial harassment. Non-release of the maturity amount under the fixed deposit scheme of SAHARA E.SHINE amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the Opp. Parties. Therefore, the complainant has come up before this Commission charging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.No.1 & 2 who are jointly and severely liable for payment of the maturity amount and prays for direction to the O.Ps to pay a sum of Rs. 1,46,272/- along with interest @ 12% from the date of deposit till the date of actual payment. Besides, the complainant claims compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards litigation cost.
2. Despite service of notice the OPs neither appeared nor filed any written version denying the allegations of the complainant for which the matter was heard on merit basing on the documents available on record.
3. The complainant in support of his stand filed certain Xerox copies of receipts, Sahara E.Shine Receipt showing payment of the amount. In receipt No. 80095338852, the complainant has deposited Rs. 19,000/- on 31/12/2011 whose maturity value is Rs. 49,628/ after a period of 96 months, the second receipt No. 80095338853 carries the maturity value Rs. 47,016/- and the third receipt No. 80095338854 whose maturity value comes to Rs. 49,628/.The complainant has deposited all together a sum of Rs. 56,000/ (fifty six thousand) only and the maturity amount of the total deposits come to Rs. 1,46,272, on date of maturity i.e. 31.12.2019.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that after maturity of the deposits as stated above, the complainant approached the OPs for release/refund of the maturity amount to which the OPs did not pay any heed which is the pivotal grievance of the complainant. Non-refund of the maturity amount on the part of the Opp. Party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The complainant also alleged that due to non-release of the amount in question, he suffered from mental agony and also sustained financial loss as at the time of need. He could not get his hard earned money due to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of the OPs. On the other hand the Opp. Parties neither turned up nor denied the allegations of the complainant which are supported by documentary evidence. Therefore, there is nothing to disbelieve the contentions of the complainant. Now therefore, taking into considerations of the submissions of the complainant and after perusal of the deposit receipts granted by the OPs, we are of the view that even after maturity of deposits made by the complainant, the OPs slept over the matter and did not release which is a gross negligence and amounts to unfair trade practice and thus the OPs are squarely liable for such deficiency. Hence the order.
ORDER
The complaint petition is allowed ex-parte against the Opp. Parties. The Opp. Parties are directed to release the amount of Rs. 2,46,272/-( Two Lakh forty six thousand two hundred seventy two) towards maturity value of the complainant under receipt No.80095338852 dated.31.12.2011, receipt No. 80095338853 dated 31.12 2011 and receipt no-80095338854 dated 31.12.2011 with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of maturity till it is refunded and further directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/( Rupees five thousand) only towards cost of litigation. The order shall be complied within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
I agree Computerized to my dictation and corrected by me.
(Sri Purna Chandra mishra) (Sri Sudhakar Senapothi)
President Member
