IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/142/2019
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
18.09.2019 26.09.2019 10.11.2022
Complainant: 1. Saifuddin
Vill & PO-Dafarpur,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742227
2. Aslenur Bibi
W/O Saifuddin Sk,
Vill & PO-Dafarpur,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742227
3. Usera Bibi
W/O Ektar Sk.
Vill & PO-Dafarpur,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742227
4. Rashid Sk
S/O Giyash Sk,
Vill & PO-Dafarpur,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742227
5. Kabir Sk
S/O Saifuddin Sk,
Vill&PO-Dafarpur,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742227
6. Lili Bibi
W/O Hanjel Sk,
Vill-Ajagar Para,
PO-Gosaipur,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742223
7. Reshma Bibi
W/O Kajem Sk,
Vill-Sadikpur,
PO-Mirjapur,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742227
8. Ruksena Bibi
W/O Lakhu Sk,
Vill-Raninagar Narad Para,
PO-Diar Raninagar,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742227
9. Nasfina Khatun
D/O Sekh Islam,
Vill-Maldova,
PO-Rajanagar,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742227
10. Seikh Islam
S/O Muntaj Sk,
Vill-Maldova,
PO-Rajanagar,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Pin-742227
-Vs-
Opposite Party: 1.Franchisee Manager,
Sahara India Pariwar
Jangipur (6153),
Raghunathganj Hospital Road,
Gate No. 1
P.O. & P.S.-Raghunathganj
Dist- Murshidabad,
Pin No. 742225
2. Sector Manager
Sahara India Pariwar,
Swarnomayee Bazar,
Station Road,
P.O. & P.S.- Berhampore
Dist- Murshidabad
Pin-742101
3. Zonal Manager,
Sahara India Pariwar,
Sahara India Sadan,
2A Shakespeare Sarani,
Kolkata-700071
4. Head Manager,
Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited,
Sahara India Bhawan 1,
Kaporthala Complex Aliganj,
Lucknow- 226024
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Monohar Mitra
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Parties : None
.
Present: Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.
Sri. Subir Sinha Roy………………………………….Member.
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
SMT. ALOKA BANDYOPADHYAY, MEMBER.
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Saifuddin and Ors. (here in after referred to as the Complainants) filed the case against Franchisee Manager Sahara India Pariwar Jangipur (6153) & Ors. (here in after referred to as the OPs) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The Complainants had deposited their money to O.P.s on different dates under the scheme of “Q Shop Plan-H” and the O.P.s issued registration certificates against their investments. All the certificate issued by the O.P.s started maturing from June, 2018 to August, 2018 and the complainants were entitled to sum of Rs. 7,84,468/- as maturity amount as per petition of complaint. After the dates of maturity the complainants visited the Office of the O.P. No. 1 several times and requested to refund their matured amounts but the O.P. No. 1 did not pay any heed to request of the complainants since long.
Finding no other alternative the complainants filed the instant case before the District Commission for appropriate relief.
Defence Case
After due service of the notices the O.P.s did not appear to controvert the plea of the complainant for the reason best known to them, so the case proceeded ex-parte against the OPs.
On the basis of the complaint and the documents filed by the complainants the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case:
Points for decision
1. Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?
2. Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?
3. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons:
Point no.1, 2 & 3
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.
The complainants for their financial gain deposited different amounts of money to the O.P.s on different dates under the scheme of “Q Shop Plan-H” and O.P.s issued registration certificate against all the investments. All these 18 certificates started maturing from June, 2018 to August, 2018 and as per the petition of complaint the complainants were entitled to the total sum of Rs. 7,84,468/- as maturity amounts on their investments. The complainants submitted Xerox copies of 18 certificates before this Commission to adjudicate the matter but till date has not produced original certificates and they found absent since long.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents filed before us we are of the view that different complainants had invested different amounts on different dates for their financial gain. So the dates of maturity of such investments are different. It is not out of the place to mention that they had filed the instant case claiming total amount of Rs. 7,84,468/-. But it is not possible to calculate the rate of interest from the documents filed by the complainants and to specify their maturity value against such investments. Moreover, the complainants had not filed any original documents till date to show their investments. So, we are of the view that the instant case should be dismissed with a liberty to file afresh.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 18.09.19 and admitted on 26.09.19. 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 dismissed.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No. CC/142/2019 be and same is dismissed against the O.P.s but without any order as to costs with a liberty to file afresh.
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
