Orissa

Cuttak

CC/97/2023

Anupama Ray - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager,Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

A K Samal

09 Aug 2023

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.97/2023

 

Anupama Ray,

W/o: Lala Arun Kumar Ray,

Resident of At:Kesharpur,

(Near Mahamaya School),

P.O:Bixibazar,Town/Dist:Cuttack,

Pin-753001.                                                        ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

1. The Branch Manager,

Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

Cuttack Branch Office, Plot No.515,

Jagannath Complex,Professor Para,

Bajrakabati, P.O:Buxibazar,

                                Town/Dist:Cuttack,Pin-753001(Odisha)

 

2. Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

        Regd. Office: Mangal Jyoti,

        101,227/2 AJC Bose Road,Kolkata,

        West Bengal-700020.

        Represented by its Managing Director.              ... Opp. Parties.

 

Present:           Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                    Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

             Date of filing:     29.03.2023

Date of Order:    09.08.2023

 

For the complainant:            Mr. A.K.Samal,Advocate.

For the O.Ps.                 :          None.

 

Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.                                                  

          The case of the complainant in short is that she had invested money by purchasing two Fixed Deposit Certificates bearing No.465004828236 & Certificate No. 465004828235 on payment of Rs.15,000/- & Rs.10,000/-from the O.Ps  on 28.02.2017 in one of the schemes of the O.Ps namely “F-64 GoldenA.Double”.  The maturity period was 64 months for the said Fixed Deposit Certificates and the maturity date was 28.6.2022 for both the certificates.  On maturity, she was entitled to receive in total an amount of Rs.50,000/- on 28.06.2022 on the Fixed Deposit Certificates.    After the maturity date, the complainant in order to get her matured amount from the O.Ps had visited the office  of the O.Ps on many occasions  but the O.Ps did not release her maturity amount.  Being harassed, the complainant had sent a legal notice to the O.Ps by speed post on 20.3.2023 but no action was taken by the O.Ps.  Hence, the complainant has filed the present case with a prayer for a direction to the O.Ps to pay her maturity amount in the certificates calculated as  Rs. 50,000/- alongwith future interest @ 18% per annum as well as compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards her financial loss, mental agony and harassment and thecomplainant has also prayed for her litigation expenses.

          The complainant has filed some documents in order to prove her case.

2.       The O.Ps did not appear.  Hence, they were set exparte.

3.         The points for determination in this case are as follows:

                         i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps  and if they had practised any unfair trade?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by her?

 

Point no.i.

The O.Ps are Co-operative Societies constituted under Multistate Co-operative Society Act,2002 and the complainant is a member of the O.Ps.  Hence, the question arose whether any dispute between the complainant and the O.Ps is maintainable before this Commission as there is provision in the said Multi State Co-operative Society Act,2002 for redressal of grievances of the complainant against the O.Ps.  In this regard the learned counsel for the complainant relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court relating to maintainability of his case reported in AIR 2004(SC) 448, in the case of the Secretary, Thirumurugan Cooperative Agricultural Credit Society Vrs. M.Lalitha (dead) through LRs and others, wherein The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that even if there is arbitration clause in the Cooperative Societies Act, Consumer Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint case as there is no provision in the said Co-operative Society Act ousting the jurisdiction of Consumer Commission.

At this juncture, it is relevant to go through the Sec-100 of the C.P.Act,2019.  In Sec-100 of the C.P.Act,2019 in clear and unambiguous terms it is stated that the provisions of the Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other Law for the time being in force.

In view of the Sec-100 of the C.P.Act,2019 as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is held that the case of the complainant is maintainable before this Commission.

Point No.ii.

The averments as made by the complainant in her complaint petition gains ample corroboration from the documentary evidence filed by her.

Admittedly, the complainant had purchased two Fixed Deposit Certificatesbearing No.465004828236 & Certificate No. 465004828235 on payment of Rs.15,000/- & Rs.10,000/- from the O. Ps on 28.02.2017 in one of the scheme of the O.Ps namely “F-64 Golden A.Double”. The contention of the complainant is supported with xerox copy of the Fixed Deposit certificates filed by her.The maturity date of the said certificates/bonds were clearly mentioned as 28.06.2022in the said certificates, which were due after 64 months of purchasing the certificates.     The O.Ps had not given the complainant the matured amount after the maturity period.  The complainant had approached the O.Ps many times to get her maturity amount but they did not give the matured amount of her certificates even after issuance of legal notice to them, which amounts to deficiency of service by the O.Ps.  In this context, there is a pertinent decision of Hon’ble National Commission reported in 2001(3) CPR, 194(NC) in the case of Smt. Kalawati & others Vrs. M/s. United Vaish Co-operative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., wherein the Hon’ble National Commission has held that non-refund of fixed deposit after maturity comes under the deficiency in service.  This decision is applicable in the present case.  The complainant had invested money with the O.Ps for earning interest.  The complainant would have earned interest if she would have invested her money in any other private sector or public sector undertaking.  But in the present case the O.Ps did not give the matured amount by which  the complainant was deprived of getting her principal amount as well as interest component.   Hence, the O.Ps have committed deficiency in service as well as had adopted unfair trade practice by not releasing the complainant’s matured amount after its maturity period.  This issue is answered in favour of the complainant. 

Point no. iii.

From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is definitely maintainable and the complainant is entitled to the maturity amount in respect of certificatesNo.465004828236 & No. 465004828235 as claimed by her.    Hence, it is so ordered;

                                    ORDER

The case is allowed exparte against the O.Ps.  The O.Ps are found to be jointly and severally liable here in this case.  Thus, the O.Ps are directed to pay the total matured amount of Rs.50,000/- towards the two nos. of “F-64 Golden A.Double” CertificatesNo.465004828236 & No. 465004828235 to the complainant alongwith interest thereon @ 8% per annum from the date of maturity i.e. 28.6.2022 till the final payment is made.  The O.Ps are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards the compensation for financial loss, mental agony and harassment as well as a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards the litigation expenses to the complainant.  This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 9^th day of August,2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.                                                                                                                                

         Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                     Member.

 

                                                                                                    Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                            President.