Haryana

Charkhi Dadri

cc/148/2019

Sh Satya Prakash - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager Sir Sahara India ( Sahara Credit Co- Operative Society Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Naveen Vashisth

23 Aug 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHARKHI DADRI.

 

                                                          Complaint Case No. 88 of 2018

                                                         Date of Institution: 31.5.2018

                                                          RBT Case No. 148 of 30.9.2019

                                                          Date of Decision: 23.08.2021

 

Satya Parkash son of Sh. Moti Lal, resident of Mori, Tehsil and District Charkhi Dadri.

 

                                                                   ….Complainant.

Versus

1. Branch Manager, Sahara India (Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Limited) Sector office, near Rose Garden, Laharu Road, Charkhi Dadri.
2. Regional Manager, Sahara India (Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited) Hansi Gate, near opposite Ramkunj, Bhiwani.
3. Saharyn E-Multipurpose Society Limited, Administrative office 195,  Ground Floor, Maharana Partap Nagar, Zone-1, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh)-462011, through Chief Manager/Director/Chairman.
4. Chief Manager/Director/Chairman, Sahara India (Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Ltd.), Registered Office Sahara India Bhavan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024.

 

                                                                   …..OPs-Respondents. 

                   COMPLAINT UNDER SECTIONS 12 OF                                                         THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Before: -     Dr. J.R. Chauhan, President.

                   Sh. Shriniwas Khundia, Member.

 

Present:       Sh. Naveen Vashisth, Adv. for complainant.

OPs already exparte.      

         

ORDER

                   Satya Parkash (hereafter referred to as “the complainant”) has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as “the OPs”) with the averments that the OP No.1 had told to complainant that Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited firm is a very large firm in India and gives a lot of benefit to depositors and on asking by the OP No.1, the complainant deposited the amount of Rs. 1,02,000/-(vide six FDs of Rs. 17,000/-each bearing certificate Nos. 304000773348 to 304000773353 on 1.7.2014) and amount of Rs. 34,000/- (vide two FDs of Rs. 17,000/-each bearing certificates No. 3040001715770 & 3040001715771 dated 13.8.2014) i.e. total amount of Rs. 1,36,000/-with the OPs for a period of 3 years for payable total maturity value of Rs. 2,20,320/-. But the OPs have failed to pay the said maturity amount to the complainant despite completion of entire required formalities for payment of maturity amount by the complainant.  Hence, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondents, it is prayed by the complainant that the OPs be directed to pay the maturity amount of Rs. 2,20,320/- along with interest, compensation and the litigation expenses besides any other relief which this Forum may found deem fit and proper.

2.                On notice, initially the OPs appeared through their counsel Sh. J.B. Saini, Adv. and filed the written statement but later on, the OPs were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 21.1.2020 due to non-appearance before this Forum (now Commission).

3.                The respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4 filed their joint written statement whereas the respondent No. 3 filed its separate written statement. In their written statement, the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4 averred that the answering respondents have not received any amount from the complainant and hence, there is no relationship of consumer and supplier between the complainant and the answering respondents. The complaint being false, wrong and baseless is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, prayed for dismissal of complaint against the answering respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4.

4.                The respondent No. 3 in its written statement averred that the complainant is not consumer of the answering respondent rather he is member of the society. The contributed amount of complainant is not the maturity amount as there is no provision of maturity in the contribution scheme and thus, the complainant is not entitled to receive the amount of Rs. 2,20,320/-from the complainant. There is no dispute between the complainant being the Member and the respondent being the Society and if there is any dispute, that can be decided under Multi State Cooperative Society Act, 2002. It is averred that the complainant is not entitled for the claimed amount of Rs. 2,20,320/-from the answering respondent. However, it is admitted by the respondent No. 3 that the complainant after taking membership of the respondent society, had contributed total amount of Rs. 1,36,000/-with the society but there is no provision under contribution scheme of maturity or pre-maturity. As per contribution scheme, the member of society will be entitled for benefits under condition No. 6 after a period of three years of contribution. There is lock in period of three years and if any member of the society do not want to take any benefit, he can withdraw contribution amount within three years according to the terms and conditions No. 10 of the society. It is averred that rules, byelaws and regulations of condition No. 8 will be binding upon the member. Accordingly, dismissal of complaint has been sought by the respondent No.3.

5.                In the exparte evidence, the complainant tendered his affidavit Ex. CW-1/A and documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-16 and closed the evidence.

6.                We have heard the exparte arguments of learned counsel of complainant and gone through the entire evidence produced on record by the complainant very carefully and minutely.

        During the course of arguments, the learned counsel of complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint filed by the complainant and has drawn the attention of this Commission towards the documents placed on record on his behalf.

7.           After hearing the exparte arguments of learned counsel for complainant, going through the entire case file and perusing the documents placed on record very carefully and minutely, we have observed that in the present complaint, the complainant by filing his affidavit (Ex. CW-1/A), has corroborated the contents of his complaint as true and correct, and has further placed on record various certificates i.e. bearing Nos. 304000773348 to 304000773353 dated 1.7.2014 (Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-6) and certificates No. 3040001715770 & 3040001715771 dated 13.8.2014 (Annexure C-7 & Annexure C-8). On perusal of aforementioned certificates (Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-8), we have observed that the said receipts/certificates bear the name of the present complainant i.e. Satya Parkash and it is specifically clear from the said certificates that the complainant has deposited the total amount of Rs. 1,36,000/- on the given dates with the OPs. However, the perusal of these certificates (Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-8) show that no maturity date is mentioned on these certificates. The counsel for the complainant has also failed to produce on record any documentary evidence which could have proved that what was the maturity date of these certificates (Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-8) issued by the OP No. 3 through OP No.1 (as there is also stamp of OP No.1 on these certificates).

8.                Further, as per their written statement, the OPs have asserted that the complainant is not consumer of the OPs rather he is member of the society as there is no provision of maturity in the contribution scheme.  However, the OP No. 3 in its written statement has admitted this fact that the complainant had contributed/deposited total amount of Rs. 1,36,000/-with the society and further admitted this fact that as per contribution scheme, the member of society will be entitled for benefits under condition No. 6 after a period of three years of contribution, then in our considered opinion, the complainant is consumer of the OPs. Though the OPs in their written have stated that the member of society will be entitled for benefits under condition No. 6 after a period of three years of contribution and if any member of the society do not want to take any benefit, he can withdraw contribution amount within three years according to the terms and conditions No. 10 of the society, but we have observed that the OPs have failed to produce on record such terms and conditions for coming to the right conclusion.

9.                From the unrebutted evidence of complainant produced in the form of certificates Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-8 for receiving the amount on mentioned dates by the OPs and also taking into consideration the contents and prayer made in affidavit (Ex. CW-1/A) filed by complainant qua the said receipts/certificates (Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-8) as true and correct and also taking into consideration the fact that the respondents have failed to put any appearance before this Commission, it is established that by not refunding the due amount on maturity date of the said scheme to the complainant, the OPs seem to have acted in a deficient and negligent manner towards the complainant in not paying the maturity amount under the terms and conditions of the said scheme, so introduced by them (OPs).

10.              In the result, we hereby direct the OPs to pay the deposited amount of Rs. 1,36,000/-(vide certificates Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-8) as per the scheme of OPs to the complainant along with interest @ of 9% per annum from the date when the amount of these certificates became payable to the complaint, till its final realization.

11.          The OPs are also directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand only) on account of mental agony, harassment etc. and Rs. 5500/-(Rs. Five Thousand Five Hundred only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. The present complaint stands allowed in the manner as indicated above.

12.           The above order be compiled within 45 days from the date of receiving the copy of this order.

13.              Copies of order be communicated to the parties free of costs.

14.              File be consigned after due compliance.

Announced.

Dated: - 23.08.2021

 

 

          (Shriniwas Khundia)                                 (Dr. J.R. Chauhan)

                 Member.                                                  President,

                                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                      Redressal Commission, Charkhi Dadri.         Sunil Kumar

            Stenographer