IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

CASE No.  CC/75/2019

Date of Filing:                        Date of Admission:                        Date of Disposal:

    20.06.2019                                              27.06.2019                                         20.05.2024

Complainant:Sanjay Ghosh,

                                S/o- Late Narayan Chandra Ghosh,

                                 Ward 5, Gobindapur, Ghoshpara,

                                P.O. + P.S.-Jiaganj, Dist-Murshidabad,

                                Pin-742123,

                                                                -Vs-

Opposite Party1.Franchisee Manager,

                        Sahara India Pariwar

                        Jiaganj (4120), High School Para,

                        P.O. & P.S.-Jiaganj, District- Murshidabad,

                        Pin-742123

                         2. Sector Manager

                        Sahara India Pariwar,

                        Swarnomayee Bazar,

                        AbhudyaySangha,

                        P.O. & P.S.- Berhampore

                        Dist- Murshidabad

                        Pin-742101

                        3. Zonal Manager

                        Sahara India Pariwar,

                        Sahara India Sadan,

                        2A Shakespeare Sarani,

                        Kolkata-700071.

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant             :           N.A.

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Parties                  :           SaugataBiswas

Present:  Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.

Sri.Nityananda Roy…………………………………….Member.

FINAL ORDER

Sri.ajaykumar das, presiding member.

This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.

One Sanjay Ghosh (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against Franchise Manager, Sahara India Pariwar, Jiaganj (4120) &Ors.(here in after referred to as the O.P.s) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

 The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-

The Complainant filed the instant petition stating that he had investedRs.59000/- under Sahara M. Benefit Scheme vide Account Nos. 41205100170 and 41205100171 respectivelyto the O.P.s. But, in spite of proper investment the Opposite Parties had denied to pay the matured amount. The Complainant several times approached the Opposite Partiesbut failed.

  Finding no other alternative the complainant filed the instant case before the District Commission for appropriate relief.

Defence Case

After due service of the notices O.P.s appeared by filing W/V contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable as it is not true that the Complainant purchased “Account Vide No. 41205100170 and 41205100171, and its mature on dt28.03.2019’ which amounts a sum of Rs. 59,000/- recurring deposit from this O.P. mentioned in the Complaint and the Complainant never submitted any documents to the O.P.s which were necessary for liquidation of matured amount. So, the petition is liable to be dismissed against the O.P.s.

Points for decision

1. Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?

2. Have the OPs any deficiency in service, as alleged?

3. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?

Decision with Reasons:

Point no.1

We peruse the complaint. The averments made in the complaint indicate that the Complainant is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as well as Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Point Nos. 2 & 3

Both these points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.

It is the case of the Complainant that hefiled the instant petition stating that he had invested Rs. 59000/- under Sahara M. Benefit Scheme vide Account Nos. 41205100170 and 41205100171 respectively to the O.P.s. But, in spite of proper investment the Opposite Parties had denied to pay the matured amount. The Complainant several times approached the Opposite Parties but in vain.

The point to be noted is that the Complainant filed evidence on affidavit.  In support of his contentions made in the complaint, the Complainant has filed photocopies of the Pass Book ofAccount No. 41205100170 and 41205100171 respectively. It is evident from said Certificates that the Complainant had invested said amount ‘under “Sahara M. Benefit Scheme”.

The Ld. Advocate of the O.P.s stated in the W/V that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in contempt petitioner © No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813/2011 with contempt petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in C/A No. 9833/2011 (SEBI us Sahara India Real Estate Company Ltd & others) passed on 21.11.2013 wherein following order has been passed:-

“ We are Convinced that the order dated 28.10.2013 passed by this Court has not been complied with in its letter and spirit in such circumstance, we direct that the Sahara Group of Companies shall not…. with any movable and immovable properties until further orders”.

The point to be noted is that the Ld. Advocate for the O.P. has not filed any decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in support of his contentions.

It is further to be noted is that neither the Complainant nor the O.P.s appeared before this Commission on repeated calls today i.e., on 20.05.2024.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents filed by the Complainant we are of the view that the Complainant has able to prove his case regarding the investment. As the O.P.s had not returned the due amount to the complainant on demand and here lies the deficiency of service on the part of the O.P.sSo, the Complainant should get the matured amount as per terms and conditions of the said scheme.

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 20.06.2019 and admitted on 27.06.2019. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act, 1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.

In the result, the Consumer case is allowed.        

Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is

Ordered

that the complaint Case No. CC/75/2019be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.P.s but under the circumstances without any order as to costs.

The O.P.s are directed to pay the matured amountalong with the interest payable as per the terms and conditions of the scheme issued by them on production of the original documents.

The aforesaid order must be complied with within 120 days from the date of passing of this order.  If the aforesaid order is not complied with within the stipulated period it will carry an interest @ of 8 per cent per annum from the date of the passing of this order.

Let plain copy of this order  be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand  /by post under proper acknowledgment  as per rules, for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:

confonet.nic.in

Dictated & corrected by me.

President

Member                                                                            President.