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

CASE No.CC/102/2018

 Date of Filing:            05.06.2018                                         Date of Final Order: 16.01.2020

Complainant:  Supriyo Adhikari

S/o Late TapanAdhikari

Vill-KandiJibdharpara,

PO&PS-Kandi,

Dist-Murshidabad

Pin-742137

-Vs-

Opposite Party:1. The Manager,

Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Limited,

 Sahara India Bhawan,

1 Kapoorthala complex,

PS-Aliganj,

 Lucknow-226024

2. Franchisee Manager,

Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Limited

Kandi Branch, Kandi School Road,

PO&PS-Kandi, Dist-Murshidabad,

Pin-742137

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : In person.

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party         : Sri. Saugata Biswas.

 Present: Sri. AsishKumarSenapati………………….......President.

                 Smt.  AlokaBandyopadhyay……………………..Member.

               Sri.  Subir Sinha Ray……………………………………...Member.

                                                FINAL ORDER

 Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay,Member.

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

One Supriyo Adhikari(here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against The Manager, Sahara Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd. and another(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 Complainant opened recurring deposit under ‘’M’’ benefit scheme of the O.Ps for five years at their kandi branch and the same has been matured on07.09.2017 and after maturity the Complainant contacted with OP but OP refuse to pay the matured amount.

After due service of notice the OPs filed written version contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable as the Complainant never submitted any documents so that the ownership of the account mentioned in the complaint can be ascertained by the OP no 2 and in spite of repeated demand by this OP the complainant has failed to provide the same .So the case is liable to be dismissed.

On the basis of the above version the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case :

Points for consideration

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

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

Point Nos. 1,2& 3

All the points taken up for consideration for the sake of convenience and brevity.

As per petition of complaint, the Complainant paid monthly recurring under ‘’M’’ benefit scheme for five years at Kandi Branch of the O.P. so the complainant is a consumer of the O.P as the complainant has hired financial service from the O.Ps .As per the petition of complaint on the date of maturity of the said monthly installment scheme i.e. 07.09.17, the Complainant contacted with the said branch office of the O.P.2 but he was refused .

But the OPs stated in written version that the Complainant has never submitted any documents so that ownership of the accounts mentioned in Complaint can be ascertained by the OP no 2.

 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the documents filed by the Complainant and argument advanced by the Party We are of the opinion that  there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs by not disbursing the due amount. It appears from the documents filled by the complainant that  he has paid only 37 installments @  Rs.500/- per installmenti.e totaling Rs 18,500/- .So, the Complainant is entitled to get back Rs 18,500/- along withinterest @ 7% p.a till 30.06.15 is  Rs. 18,500/- + Rs. 2069/- ( interest) = Rs.20,569/- and interest @7% p.a till payment on production of the original documents along with a litigation cost of Rs. 500/- and Rs. 500/- for mental pain and agony. Therefore, the OPs may be directed to pay Rs.20,569/- along with interest @ 7% p.a. w.e.f. 01.07.15 till realization of the entire amount

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 05.06.18 and admitted on 12.07.18. This Forum 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 order.

In the result, the Consumer case succeeds.

Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is

                                                Ordered

that the complaint Case No.CC/102/2018 be and the same is hereby allowed on contest against the OPswith litigation cost of Rs.500/-

The OPs aredirected to pay Rs.20,569/- along with interest @ 7% p.a. w.e.f. 01.07.15 till realization of the entire amount to the complainant by 60 days from the date of production of original documents before the O.P. No.2.i.d. it shall carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of this order till compliance.

The OPs are directed to pay  Rs.500/- as litigation cost  and Rs.500/- for mental pain and agony by 60 days from the date 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.

Member

        Member                                      Member                          President.