MRS RAJASHREE AGARWALLA, MEMBER-

             Deficiency in service in respect of non-payment of monthly interest on fixed Time-Deposit scheme are the allegations arrayed against the Ops.

2.                        Complaint in brief reveals that, Op-1 &2 are the President and Secretary of Subhashree Multipurpose Society, operates within the Revenue district of Kendrapara. It is revealed from the Complaint, that Op-Co-Operative Society to proceure their business allured the people of the locality to deposit money in their Society on different schemes to get more financial benefits. Accordingly, Complainant to get more interest and to keep the money on safe custody opted for a fixed time deposit scheme and deposited Rs. 1 lakh on dt. 12/12/2012. As per the scheme the Op- Society has to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month and the maturity deposit of said scheme completes on dt. 13/12/2017. Op- Society on deposit of amount of Rs. 1 lakh issued a fixed deposit certificate and slip bearing No. SLTIP/09/114. It is also revealed that, though Complainant was entitled to receive the monthly interest of Rs. 3,000/- per month as per the scheme, but Op- Society did not pay the amount and deferred the matter inspite of repeated follow up for refund of money by the Complainant. Hence, the Complaint before the Forum with prayer that a direction may be given to Ops to Pay Rs. 2,96,000/- which includes the deposited amount, its interest and compensation for mental agony and cost of litigation.

3.                   Upon Notice Op-1, President, Pradyumna Kumar Mishra of Subhashree Multipurpose Co-Operative Society appeared through their Ld. Counsel and filed written statement into the dispute challenging the maintainability of the Complaint and also denies the allegations of the Complaint. Op-1 submitting the facts of the dispute averred that the Op-Society is registered under Co-Operative Act, and as per the rules the Executive members are elected for one year, accordingly President Op-1 was elected and continues as President of the Society from dt. 12/08/2013 to dt. 11/08/2014 and after dt. 11/08/2014 the Op-1 has no connection with the Society. It is averred in the written statement that, Secretary of Society is the Chief executive and the Op-1 has no knowledge regarding the deposit and issue of fixed deposit slip dt. 12/12/2012 and Complainant has never requested the Op-1 to disclose the monthly interest. It is further alleged that Complainant has dragged the Op-1 to the present litigation with an oblique motive and for redressal of grievance, the Complainant has to sought shelter of comptent Forum and accordingly the Complaint is to be dismissed with cost against Op-1.

                       During pending of the proceeding Notice was not served to the Secretary of the Society and considering the petition filed by Complainant, the Op-2 was deleted from the proceeding vide this Forums order No. 18 dtd. 11/08/2017.

 4.                  Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant and Op-1. In support of his claim, Complainant filed attested Xerox copies of documents as per the list. The Op-1 in the present dispute challenge the maintainability of the Complaint by submitting that as the Op-Society is registered under Co-operative Act, this Forum has no Jurisdiction to entertain the Complaint. In this regard we, opine that U/S 3 of C.P.Act, 1986, where the provision clarifies that the Act is in addition to and not in derogation to any other provisions of any other law, hence it is clear that it is option of the Complainant/consumer/member to take shelter of law under the Act of his choice. Accordingly the Complaint is maintainable before this Forum under C.P.Act. 1986. While deciding the allegation of non-refund of fixed deposit amount of the Complainant and accrued monthly interest there in, the contesting Op-1 countered the same by stating that as per the rules the Executive body elected for a period for one year and the Op-1 was the President of the Society from dt. 12/08/2013 to dt/ 11/08/2014 and he has no knowledge about the transaction of the Complainant with the Op- Society as alleged by the Complainant.

                     It is also noticed that no such evidence or bye-laws or Rules presented before this Forum to ascertain that the Op-1 is continuing in the post of President of Op-Society and has any direct knowledge regarding alleged transactions of the Complainant. Further, Secretary of the Op- Secretary is deleted from the proceeding, who seems to be the chief executive and accountable for day to day transaction of the Society. So, in the circumstances we, can’t liable the Op-1, President. But the facts of deposit Rs. 1lakh on dt. 12/12/2012 vide serial No. DS/114 and the monthly interest slip dt. 12/12/2012 bearing certificate no. SCTIP/09/114 granted on behalf of the Op-Society to the Complainant can’t be disbelieved and Complainant is deserved to refund his deposit as per the law. Equally, in last few years we have seen this type of rampant allegations of misappropriation of money of a common man by different financial Institutions and Societies. So, we are of view that a liberty should be given to the Complainant-depositor for redressal of his grievances by approaching appropriate authority/Commission and limitation, if any, for filing of such application/representation should not be a legal obstruction for its consideration.                                                      

                 Accordingly, the Complaint is disposed of without any cost.

                Pronounced in the open Court, this   11th day of December, 2017.               

                  I, agree.                             I, agree.

                   Sd/-                                       Sd/-                          Sd/-

            MEMBER                         PRESIDENT              MEMBER