Sri Ranjan Ray, Ld. Member

FINAL ORDER/ JUDGEMENT

This complaint was initially filed under the provision of C.P. Act, 2019 against the Opposite Party- 1) Sahara Credit Co- operative Society Limited, Sahara India Parivar, Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow, Utter Pradesh- 226024, 2) The Branch Manager, Sahara India Parivar, Fulbari Hat Branch, P.O.- Fulbari, P.S.- N.J.P., Dist.: Jalpaiguri- 734015 and 3) The Branch Manager, Sahara India Parivar, S.F. Road, P.O.- Siliguri Bazar, Dist.- Darjeeling- 734005 who appeared in this case but did not file W.V. and vide Order No. 07, dated 08.08.2023 of this Commission the case runs ex- parte against O.P. No. 1, 2 and 3.

The case of the complainant as per his complaint is as follows-

The complainant purchased 01 (One) “ABODE Bond” on 06.04.2010 amounting to Rs. 25,500/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand and Five Hundred) only from the O.P. No.1 through one of the Agent of O.P. No.3 but did not issue any certificate to her. After elapsing of one year when the complainant asked the O.P. No.3 about her bond certificate, they informed her that the O.P.s had invested the maturity value the said ABODE Bond into “Q Shop Goods (Exist) Plan H” and this investment was done by the O.P.s without intimating the complainant. On repeated visit and requested the O.P. No.3 issued one Receipt being No. 71024171166 and one certificate being No. 562008775400 to the complainant. In urgent need of money, the complainant wished to surrender her said “Q Shop Goods (Exist) Plan H” and for which she issued a letter on 23.04.2015 but the O.P.s did not make any reply. The complainant several times visited and requested the O.P. No.3 to get the surrendered value of her “Q Shop Goods (Exist) Plan H” but the O.P. No.3 replied that they were not able to give the surrendered value to her since the said amount had already transferred to the O.P. No.2. The complainant repeatedly visited both the Branch Office of O.P. No.2 and 3 but did not get any result. On 24.02.2022 the complainant sent a legal notice to the O.P.s but they did not make any reply. Finally having no other alternative the complainant lodged this complaint.

The prayers of complainant are as follows: -

1. To pass an order directing the O.P.s to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) only to the complainant for mental agony, unnecessary harassment, gross negligence and deficiency in service.
2. To pass an order directing the O.P.s to pay the entire maturity value of the aforesaid scheme, i.e., ABODE Bond” which the O.P.s turned into as “Q Shop Goods (Exist) Plan H” (as per terms and conditions) plus interests till the realization.
3. To pass an order directing the O.P.s to pay penalty @18% p.a. on the maturity value.
4. To pass an order directing the O.P.s to pay the entire cost of this case.
5. Any other relief/ reliefs to which the complainant is entitled both in law and equity.

List of Documents filed by the complainant:

1. Photocopy as well as original money receipt being No. 71024171166, and certificate being No. 562008775400, dated 22.10.2012.
2. Photocopy of letter, dated 23.04.2015.
3. Photocopy of legal notice, dated 24.02.2022.
4. Photocopy of postal registration slips.
5. Photocopy of tracking reports.
6. Photocopy of Aadhaar Card of the complainant.
7. Photocopy of Voter ID Card of the complainant.
8. Photocopy of e- PAN Card of the complainant.

 The Opposite Party-1) Sahara Credit Co- operative Society Limited, Sahara India Parivar, Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow, Utter Pradesh- 226024, 2) The Branch Manager, Sahara India Parivar, Fulbari Hat Branch, P.O.- Fulbari, P.S.- N.J.P., Dist.: Jalpaiguri- 734015 and 3) The Branch Manager, Sahara India Parivar, S.F. Road, P.O.- Siliguri Bazar, Dist.- Darjeeling- 734005 appeared in this case but did not file W.V. and vide Order No. 07, dated 08.08.2023 of this Commission the case runs ex- parte against O.P. No. 1, 2 and 3.     

Having heard, the Ld. Advocate of the complainant and on perusal of the complaint and documents filed by the complainant the following points are taken to be decided by this Commission.

POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION

1) Whether the complainant is a consumer?

2) Whether the case is maintainable under the CP act 2019?

3) Whether this Commission has its jurisdiction to decide this case? 

4) Whether there is any deficiency in service in the part of the O.P. as alleged by the complainant?

5) Is the complainant is entitled to get any award and relief as prayed for? If so, what extent?

DECISION WITH REASONS

          All the points are taken up together for consideration and decision.

Seen and perused the complaint petition which is supported by the affidavit, documents filed by the complainants. We are also heard arguments of the complainant in full length.

The complainant resides in Siliguri, Dist.-Darjeeling and the O.P. No.3 was carrying his business in Siliguri, Dist.- Darjeeling and O.P. No.3 and 4 were also carrying their business at Bagdogra, Dist.- Darjeeling. Thus, the Commission has no doubt that the complainant is a very much consumer as per the Consumer Protection Act- 2019 and also there is no doubt that this Commission has its territorial jurisdiction to decide this case.

In order to prove the case the Complainant has filed its evidence in the form of an Affidavit and in the Written Complainant has specifically corroborated the Complaint and has stated on which day he purchased the Bond/ policy/ certificate of Rs. 25,500/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand and Five Hundred) only being Receipt No. 71024171166 from the O.P.s and the O.P.s further reinvested the maturity amount of the said Bond into the “Q Shop Goods (Exist) Plan H”. The Complainant has also stated how many times he intimated the O.P.s through letters for demanding the certificate and maturity amount in respect of his Bond/ policy/ certificate from the O.P.s. but the O.P.s did not make any payment till today.

At the time of argument Ld. Advocate of the Complainant submits that the complainant has been able to prove its case against the O.P.s not only through their Written Deposition but also by producing documents.

The complainants several times tried to get her legitimate claim but the O.P.s failed to settle the said legitimate claim.

Firstly, to determine the case we can refer a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court where it held that the disputes between Co-operative Society and its member regarding deficiency in Service can be maintained under the Consumer Protection Act vide the case of The Secretary, Thirumurugan Co-operative Agricultural Society Vs. M. Lalitha (Dead) through LRS (Appeal, Civil 92 of 1998) decided on 11.12.2003.

It was also decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Virender Jain Versus Alkananda Co-op. Group Housing Society Ltd. (2013) 9 SCC 383 it was held that dispute raises by the members of the society can be decided by the Consumer Forum.

In view of those decisions and other materials on record we are of the view that this Commission has sufficient Jurisdiction to entertain this Complaint as a Consumer dispute and thereby this case is maintainable.

To determine the case also from the point of jurisdiction, the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble National Consumer Commission in the case of “Aftab Singh - Versus- Emaar MGF Land Limited & anr” being Consumer Case No. 701 of 2015 Vide Order dt. 13.07.2017 wherein it was held that, an arbitration clause in the Agreements cannot circumscribe the jurisdiction of a Consumer Forum notwithstanding the Amendments made to Section 8 of the Arbitration Act. Against that Order Civil Appeals bearing in No. 23512-23513 of 2017 was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. But the said Appeal was dismissed on 13.02.2018. Against that Order Review Petition being No. 2629-2630 of 2018 was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and on 10.12.2018 that Review Application was also dismissed. In view of the above there is no doubt that this Commission has its jurisdiction to decide this case.

In the case in hand there is no dispute that the Complainant was not provided with Investment Certificates. It is also not denied / disputed that, the Complainant did not deposit the Sum of money to the O.P.s. It is also admitted fact that, the O.P.s on receiving the sum of money issued deposit certificates to the complainant.

The complainant several times tried to get her legitimate claim but the O.P.s failed to settle her said legitimate claim.

So, as per the above discussion it is very much clear that there was a deficiency of service from the part of O.P.s and this Commission has no doubt to hold that there was a deficiency of services from the part of the O.P.s. In the instance case, the complainant is entitled to get the entire maturity amount in total, against the O.P.s along with the interest @ 9% Per Annum from the date of maturity of her said bond/ policies/ certificates till the realization of the total amount. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only for harassment, mental pain and agony and Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only for litigation cost and the O.P.s are also directed to deposit Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only to Consumer Legal Aid Account of this Commission.  

That the Consumer Case No. 65/2023 be and same is allowed on merit against the O.P.s (Sahara Credit Co- operative Society Limited).

Hence it is,

ORDERED

That the Consumer Case No. 65/ 2023 be and same is allowed on merit against the O.P.s (Sahara Credit Co- operative Society Limited). The O.P.s are jointly and severally liable in this case.

The complainant is entitled to get the entire maturity amount of the said in total, against the O.P.s along with the interest @ 9% Per Annum from the date of maturity of her said bond/ policies/ certificates till the realization of the total amount. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only for harassment, mental pain and agony, Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only as litigation cost and the O.P.s are also directed to deposit Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only to Consumer Legal Aid Account of this Commission.  

Let a copy of this judgment be given to the parties directly or through their representative Ld. Advocate for compliance free of cost.