Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/21/17

Nirmal Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dulchi Majra Cooperative CASSMP Society - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Satwant Singh Saini, Adv.

17 Mar 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUEMR DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, RUPNAGAR

 

                                                                    Consumer Complaint No.17 of 2021

                                                                         Date of Decision:  17.03.2023

 

Nirmal Singh son of Gurcharan Singh &Charan Singh resident of Village Haripur &Rormajra, Tehsil and District Rupnagar.

                                                                                              …Complainant

                                                          Versus

1. The DulchiMajra, co-operative CASSMP Society ltd. DulchiMajra, Po Boor Majra Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar through its president/Administrator.
2. Sukhjinderpal Singh son of Sucha Singh secretary the DulchiMajra Co-operative CASSMP society ltd. DulchiMajra, Po Boor Majra, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar.

Second Address:

Sukhjinder Pal Singh son of Sucha Singh resident of village solkhian, Po PathreriJattan, Tehsil and District Rupnagar.

3. Nirmal Singh son of Labh Singh resident of village DulchiMajra, Po Boor Majra, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar, Ex- President of the DulchiMajra co- operative CASSMP Society Ltd.
4. Assistant Registrar Co-operative society Rupnagar, Tehsil and District Rupnagar.

….Opposite Parties

(Complaint under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act)

QUORUM:

                   KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

                   RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

                   RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER

 

ARGUED BY:

For complainant:            S.S. Saini, Advocate

OP No.1 exparte

For Ops No.2,3 &4:       Sh. VK Sharma, Advocate      

 ORDER

PER KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant on the averments that the complainant is a share holder of the DulchiMajra, CASS and having account no. 226 RM with OP No. 1 the complainant having a bank account with the, The Ropar Central Co- Operative Bank, Rupnagar bearing No. 00194 and share money of the complainant with the OP No.1 is Rs. 6500/-The father of the complainant namely Gurcharan Singh &Charan Singh also having a accounts with the Ropar Central Co-operative Bank, Rupnagar, through OP No. 1 bearing numbers MT 170200111100047 along with its ID No. 005156152 and Agriculture Loan account no. 170260010301535. The father of the complainant having account with OP No.1 bearing account no. 128 RM and the father of the complainant has also share money with the OP No. 1 is Rs. 17,000/-. Charan Singh & Gurcharan Singh i.e. father of the complainant having a agriculture limit of 6 acres land with the OP No. 1. The father of the complainant took a MT loan of Rs. 2 Lacs from the Ropar Central Co-operative Bank, Rupnagar through OP No. 1. In this respect the entry has made in the passbook of father of the complainant which was issued by the OP No.1. The father of the complainant had died on 21.10.2016. The father of the complainant returned the MT Loan amount of Rs. 58,220/- in two installments i.e. Rs. 26, 230 on 07.11.2015and Rs. 31,990/- on 05.05.2016. After the death of the father of the complainant, the complainant returned the Mt loan amount of his returned the Mt loan amount of this father to the OP no. 1 of Rs. 1,81,530/- in installments i.e. Rs. 63,250/- on 02.06.2017, Rs. 5,770/- on 22.06.2018, Rs. 30,000/- on 15.11.2019 . So the complainant and his father totally returned the Mt loan amount to the OP No. 1 along with interest. The total amount which was returned to the OP no. 1 of Rs. 2,39,750/ Now nothing is due against the MT loan towards the complainant and his father. The father of the complainant also took a farmer loan of Rs. 2,10,081/- in the year 2016 by different modes i.e. Rs. 1,41,000/- in cash on 06.05.2016 vide cheque no. 76192, fertilizer of Rs. 16,500/- vide cheque no. 76193 on 06.05.2016, fertilizer of Rs. 21, 935/- vide cheque no. 76194 on 18.05.20216 and fertilizer of Rs. 30,646/- vide cheque no. 76195 on 24. 05. 2016. The complainant returned the above said farmers loan of his father of Rs. 1, 00, 000/- on 08.06.2017. It is further averred that thereafter the complainant cleared the entire loan amount of this father and in this respect entry was made by the OP No. 2 in the passbook of father of the complainant and Nill the entire loan amount. The Punjab Government has waived the loan of the father of the complainant and credit Rs. 2,00,000/- in the account of father of the complainant with OP No. 1. As per the scheme of government the loan which was pending on 31.03.2017 would be waived off upto two lacs. So on 31. 03. 2017 the loan of the father of the complainant above two lacs. Thereafter the government on 05.06.2018 credit Rs. 2,00,000/- in the account of father of the complainant. Even the complainant has already cleared the above said loan of his father and till now the waived amount of Rs. 2, 00,000/- is still pending towards the OP No. 1. When the complainant returned the loan amount to OP No.1, at that time the OPs assured the complainant that when the government waived the loan, the amount deposited by the government would be released to the complainant. As per assurance and being a son of charan Singh &  Gurcharan Singh the complainant returned the entire loan amount to the OPs. All the time of adjusting the entire loan amount, the OP no. 1 to 3 assured the complainant that they assured the complainant that they will return the balance amount to the complainant within short period, but they did not gave the same till today. The amount to Rs. 2,00,000/- along with interest is still pending towards the OPs. The OP no. 3 is the president of the OP No.1, OP No.2 is a secretary, OP No.4 is the controller of the co-operative societies. All the co-operatives societies are running under the control of OP No. 4. The amount received by the OP No. 2 did not deposit in the bank and in the DulchiMajra CASS. The OPs in connivance with each other wrongly and illegally show balance loan amount of Rs. 76,196/- on 05.06.2018. As per statement of the RoaprCenteral Bank the balance loan amount is Rs. 10,081/- against the father of the complainant. Even the complainant has already cleared the entire loan amount of his father. As per the pass book of the father of the complainant which is issued by OP No. 1 and 2, the credit amount is Rs. 28, 621/- on 05.06.2018. When the complainant knows about the embezzlement committed by OP No. 1 to 3, then the complainant moved an application to the OP No. 4 on 01.10.2020, but the OP No. 4 did not take any action against the OP No. 1 to 3.   The OP No. 1 to 3 wrongly and illegally sent a notice for depositing the amount of Rs. 42,11/- on or before 06.10.2020, which they have no right to do so, because the  complainant has already cleared the loan amount of his father. Due to the deficiency in services and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs the complainant has suffered monetary, physical, mental pain, agony, harassment and lose. So the Ops liable to pay Rs. 20,000/- ad damages to the complainant on this score also along with Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Upon notice, OP1 has choosen to remain again exparte vide order dated
3. The OPs No.2 &3 have appeared and filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the complaint is not maintainable; that this Hon’ble Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. On merits, it is stated that there was no ex secretary namely Gurmeet Singh in the society so embezzlement committed by him does not arise at all in the loan account of Gurcharan Singh @ Charan Singh. It is incorrect that the Surinderpal Singh has given the award on 09.06.2005 against Gurcharan Singh son of Surjit Singh ex-Secretary of the society. It is also incorrect that the amount is recoverable from Gurcharan Singh son of Surjit Singh Ex-Secretary of the society. Rest of allegations levelled by the complainant against the answering Ops have been denied and prayed for dismissal the present complaint against the answering OPs.
4. The learned counsel for the OP4 has filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant is not consumer of the answering OP, rather he is member of the DulchiMajra Cooperative CASS MP Society DulchiMajra; that this Hon’ble Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint; that the answering OP has no concern with the business of the society; that the complainant has not come to this Commission with clean hands; that the complainant has suppressed the material facts from this Court; that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint against the answering OPs. On merits, it is admitted that Nirmal Singh complainant is member of the society as the answering OP1 is called the society and the society is governed by the bye laws of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act and rules framed there under. The complainant being member of the society is bound by the bye laws and rules framed under the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act,  if any dispute arose between the society and its member then the matter will be brought before the Arbitrator and the Arbitrator will decide the matter. In the present complaint, there is dispute between the society and its members, so the same can be decided by the Arbitrator.
5. In support of their case, the learned counsel for the complainant has tendered duly sworn affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A along with documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C14 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs No.2,3 & 4 has tendered various documents in support of their version.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record file, carefully and minutely.
7. The learned counsel for the complainant has placed on record document Ex.C2, vide which the complainant has filed a complaint before the OP4 for recovery of the amount of the complainant. He placed on record Ex.C3 i.e. Passbook, which shows the complainant took Rs.2,00,000/- as MT Loan on 24.07.2015 and same return by the complainant and has paid Rs.1,91,053/- along with interest of Rs.48,697/- on different dates.  Vide Ex.C4 i.e. notice issued by the OP1 to OP3 for recovery of Rs.42,110/-. Ex.C1, Ex.C5, Ex.C6, Ex.C7 & Ex.C8 are receipts of amount returned of Rs.1,00,000/- on 08.06.2017, Rs.63,250/- on 30.05.2017, Rs.30510/- on 23.5.2019, Rs.57770/- on 22.06.2018, Rs.30,000/- on 15.11.2019 respectively by the complainant.  The learned counsel for the complainant has placed on record the passbook of account No.170260010301535 i.e. which shows that the complainant has cleared entire loan amount on 6.7.2017 and shows that the loan account is nil under the signatures of OP2. The learned counsel for the complainant also placed on record Ex.C10 to Ex.C14, which shows that OP No.2 has not deposited the amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, Rs.30,000/-, Rs.63250/- in the bank. The complainant also placed on record the account statement of the bank of ST Loan bearing account No.170260010301535, which shows that the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was deposited by the Government in the account of father of the complainant. At the time of arguments, the learned counsel for the complainant has placed on record the voucher dated 26.8.2021 of Rs.1,00,000/- and argued that the OP1 and OP2 forcibly and illegally got deposited the said amount. The copy of the voucher shown to the counsel for OPs and the Ops admitted the same and correct. The learned counsel for the complainant also produced the bank account statement of MT Loan account bearing No.170200111100047, which shows that the OPs No.1 & 2 has not deposited the amount with the bank which received by the Ops vide receipts Ex.C1, Ex.C5, Ex.C7 & Ex.C8. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Ops has admitted the fact that the complainant has deposited the above said amounts and also admitted that the Government has waive off Rs.2,00,000/- of the father of the complainant. He argued that the complainant has no right to recover the amount from the Ops and only right to recover the same by the society.
8. In view of above discussion and evidence placed on record by both the parties, the complaint stands allowed with the direction to the OP1 to refund the amount deposited by the complainant along with interest @ 6% per annum. The OP1 is also directed to pay a compensation to the tune of Rs.3000/- along with litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.2000/-. The OP1 is further directed to comply with the said order within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Free certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be indexed & consigned to the Record Room.
9.  

 

                                               

                            

 

                          (Ranvir Kaur)                               (Ramesh Kumar Gupta)                                 (Kuljit Singh)

                             Member                                             Member                                                        President