BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHARKHI DADRI.
Complaint Case No. 67 of 2020
Date of Institution: 27.7.2020
Date of Decision: 23.08.2021
Rajpal Verma son of Sh. Hardatt, aged about 42 years and permanent resident of village and post office Kaliyana, Tehsil and District Charkhi Dadri.
….Complainant.
Versus
- Manager, Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., above Dr. Goyal Hospital, Loharu Road, Charkhi Dadri.
- MD/CEO, Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Registered office Sahara India Bhawan, 1 Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024.
…..OPs/Respondents.
COMPLAINT UNDER THE
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Before: - Dr. J.R. Chauhan, President.
Sh. Shriniwas Khundia, Member.
Present: Sh. Sachin Maratha, Adv. for complainant.
Sh. Manoj Kumar, Adv. for the OPs.
ORDER
Rajpal (hereafter referred to as “the complainant”) has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as “the OPs”) with the allegations that the being attracted by the benefits as explained by the OP No.1, the complainant opted to deposit Rs. 1300/-per month from 27.1.2014 and accordingly, deposited total amount of Rs. 41,600/-in 32 monthly installments of Rs. 1300/-each to reap the benefits. Thereafter, the complainant completed entire requirements for payment of maturity amount and he was assured by the respondents to make the payment of maturity amount within a period of 2-3 days. But the OPs have failed to make any payment despite many visits and requests of complainant. Hence, by alleging deficiency in service on the part of respondents, the complainant seeks directions against the respondents to pay the total maturity amount of Rs. 41,600/- along with interest, compensation and the litigation expenses besides any other relief which this Forum (now Commission) may found deem fit and proper.
2. On notice, the OPs appeared and filed the written statement. The OPs took raised some preliminary objections that the complainant is not a consumer of the OPs, that there is no relationship between the complainant and the respondents as a service provider etc. On Merits, it is asserted by the OPs that the complainant never approached to the respondents for the amount, which he has claimed. The opposite party is a multipurpose co-operative society registered under the Multi-State Co-Operative Societies Act 2002. The opposite party is not collecting the funds from the general public for the purpose of investment, rather the members of the society made a contribution to the society. The payment, if any, was strictly payable as per terms and conditions of the contribution. It is averred that the opposite parties never caused any loss, agony and inconvenience or harassment to the complainant. The complainant is not entitled to get any relief and compensation from the opposite parties and accordingly, dismissal of complaint has been prayed for by the respondents.
3. The complainant in support of his case, has filed his affidavit Ex. CW-1/A and documents Ex. CW-1 to Ex. Cw-4 and closed the evidence.
4. On the other hand, the OPs failed to tender any evidence despite availing sufficient opportunities and ultimately, the evidence of OPs was closed by court order by this Commission on 16.8.2021.
5. We have heard the arguments advanced by both the learned counsel for the parties. All the documents have been perused very carefully and minutely.
During the course of arguments, the learned counsel of complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint filed by the complainant and the learned counsel for the OPs reiterated the contents of written statement filed by the OPs and have drawn the attention of this Commission towards the documents placed on record by their respective parties.
6. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, going through the entire case file and perusing the documents placed on record very carefully and minutely, we have observed that in the present complaint, the complainant by filing his affidavit (Ex. CW-1/A), has corroborated the contents of his complaint as true and correct, and has further placed on record recurring deposit documents Ex. CW-1 to Ex. CW-3. On perusal of documents Ex. CW-1 & Ex. CW-2, it has been observed that the OPs issued the passbook in the name of complainant Raj Pal Verma under Membership No. 24821400047, A/c No. 24825100126 under the scheme Sahara. M. Benefit for a period of 60 months for receiving denomination amount of Rs. 1300/-per month from the complainant. As per document (Ex. CW-2), the account opening date was 27.1.2014 and date of maturity was 27.1.2019. Further, on perusal of document (Ex. CW-3) placed on record by the complainant, we have observed that the complainant have deposited total amount of Rs. 41,600/-in 32 installments i.e. Rs. 1300/-each installment, till 15.9.2016 commencing from 27.1.2014. We have observed that the complainant in his complaint duly supported by his sworned affidavit (Ex. CW-1) has clearly mentioned that he paid 32 monthly installments @ Rs. 1300/-each to reap the benefits but while filing their written statement, the respondents nowhere denied the said averments of complainant mentioned in the complaint and merely saying in written statement that the complainant never approached to the OPs for the amount, which he has claimed, is not sufficient. Moreover, the respondents failed to tender any evidence to controvert the allegations of complainant. Hence, it is presumed that the complainant has rightly claimed the above mentioned deposited amount of Rs. 41,600/-from the OPs.
7. From the unrebutted evidence of complainant produced in the form of documents Ex. CW-1 to Ex. CW-3 and corroborated by affidavit (Ex. CW-1/A) filed by complainant, it is established that by not refunding the deposited amount on maturity date of the said scheme to the complainant, the OPs have acted in a deficient and negligent manner towards the complainant in not paying the maturity amount under the terms and conditions of the said scheme, so introduced by them (OPs).
8. In the result, we hereby direct the OPs to pay the said total maturity amount of Rs. 41,600/- (as per documents Ex. CW-1 to Ex. CW-3) to the complainant along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of final maturity of said RD account No. 24825100126 i.e. 27.1.2019 till its final payment.
9. The OPs are also directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 7000/- (Rs. Seven Thousand only) on account of mental agony, harassment etc. and Rs. 5500/-(Rs. Five Thousand Five Hundred only) as litigation expenses. The present complaint stands allowed in the manner as indicated above.
10. The above order be compiled within 45 days from the date of receiving the copy of this order.
11. Copies of order be communicated to the parties free of costs.
12. File be consigned after due compliance.
Announced.
Dated: - 23.08.2021
(Shriniwas Khundia) (Dr. J.R. Chauhan)
Member. President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Charkhi Dadri. Sunil Kumar
Stenographer
