Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

1.       The complainant  has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (now section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) on the allegations that Opposite Party No.1 is Credit Cooperative Society and it used to get deposit  the amount from various consumers through different schemes on interest basis. Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 are the authorized Franchise as well as regional offices of Opposite Party No.1 company at Moga as well as at Ludhiana. Opposite Party No. 2 is Incharge  cum Responsible person for acts and deeds of Opposite Party No.1 here at Moga. Further alleges on the allurement of Opposite Party No.2, the complainant deposited her hard earned money with Opposite Parties in the shape of different Fixed Deposit Receipts for 96 months on interest basis, for Sahara E Shine Plan, the detail of which as follows:-

Further as per the terms and conditions of the FDRs, after completion of 96 months from the date of opening of account, maturity shall be paid to the Member Account Holder alongwith the interest as per the Account Settlement Chart and in this way, the said FDRs were matured on 06.01.2020 and on the maturity dates, the amount payable to the complainant comes to Rs.1,04,480/-. As such, there is relationship of consumer and service provider between the parties as provided under the Consumer Protection Act. On the maturity dates, the Opposite Parties were bound to make the maturity amount of the hard earned money of the complainant. The complainant made various requests to the Opposite Parties to release maturity amount deposited by the complainant in the shape of FDRs mentioned above. Initially, the Opposite Parties asked the complainant to wait for some months, but later on  the Opposite Parties have been lingering on the matter on one pretext or the other. Now, the Opposite Parties have flatly refused to pay any amount to the complainant, as such, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Repeated requests have been made by the complainant to the opposite parties to make the maturity amount of the FDRs in question, and not indulge the complainant into any litigation, but the opposite parties refused to admit the rightful claim of the complainant. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)      Opposite Parties may be directed to make the maturity amount of Rs.1,04,480/- of the FDRs alongwith future interest  @ 18 % per annum from the date of maturity dates till its actual realization. 

b)      The amount of Rs.1,00,000/- be allowed to be paid by the opposite parties on account of compensation due to mental tension and harassment caused by the complainant.

c)       The cost of complaint amounting to Rs.33,000/- may please be allowed.

d)      And any other relief to which this Commission may deem fit be granted in the interest of justice and equity.       

2.       Upon service of notice, none has come present on behalf of Opposite Parties No.1 & 3. Hence, Opposite Parties No.1 & 3 were proceeded against exparte.

3.       Opposite Party No.2 appeared in person and filed written reply taking preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable qua the answering Opposite Party. All the record of franchisee office of Moga has been taken by the Opposite Parties No.1 & 3 from the answering Opposite Party. Now, the incharge of the Moga City from Sahara India Pariwar, Smt. Sheela Kumari, Sector Manager, Sahara India Parivar Ludhiana. The complainant has got no locus-standi to file the present complaint qua the answering Opposite Party. No deficiency in service has been attributed to the answering Opposite Party and from the allegations in the complaint no deficiency in service is made out. On merits, remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint is made.

4.       In order to  prove  his  case, the complainant has tendered into evidence  his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C5.

4.       On the other hand,  to rebut the evidence of the complainant,  Opposite Party No.2 tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.OP2/A alongwith copy of document Ex.OP2/1.

5.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and gone through the documents placed  on record.

6.       During the course of arguments, both the ld.counsel for the Complainant as well as Opposite Parties  have mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint as well as in written reply respectively.   The deposit of the amount by the complainant with Opposite Parties not disputed.  We have perused the contentions of ld. counsel for the complainant. The case of the complainant is that he deposited his hard earned money with Opposite Parties in the shape of different Fixed Deposit Receipts for 96 months on interest basis and thereafter the complainant was urgent need of his money in view of prevailing situation arising due to Covid-19 and he made request to the opposite parties to release maturity amount deposited by the complainant in the shape of FDRs, but  the opposite parties are lingering on the matter on one pretext or the other and hence, deficiency is writ large on the part of the opposite parties. To prove his case the complainant has produced on record his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of deposited receipts Ex.C2 to Ex.C4 and copy of aadhar card Ex.C5. The evidence produced by the complainant has gone un-rebutted on record as the Opposite Parties no.1 & 3,  despite due service, did not opt to appear and contest the proceedings. In this way, the Opposite Parties no.1 & 3 have impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. It also shows that Opposite Parties have no defence to offer or defend the complaint. However, opposite party no.2 appeared in person and contended that all the record of franchisee office of Moga has been taken by the opposite party no.1 & 3 from the answering opposite party. Now, the inchrage of the Moga City from Sahara India Pariwar, Smt.Sheela Kumari, Sector Manager, Sahara India Parivar, Ludhiana.

7.       The subscription of scheme is not disputed between the parties. Complainant deposited the amount with the opposite parties is also not disputed. Moreover, from the perusal of the records it has been proved that the complainant has deposited the above mentioned amount with the opposite parties as per scheme.

8.       Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint  of the complainant. The Opposite Parties are jointly or severally directed to make the payment of deposited amount i.e. Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Fourty Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 8% per annum from the date of its deposit till its actual realization. The compliance of this order be made by the Opposite Parties within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the Complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Commission. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Commission.