Haryana

Panchkula

CC/508/2021

RAJIV MITTAL. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAHARA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

J.S THAKUR

20 Sep 2023

ORDER

 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  PANCHKULA

 

 

Consumer Complaint No	:	508 of 2021
Date of Institution	:	10.12.2021
Date of Decision	:	20.09.2023

 

Rajiv Mittal s/o Sh. Jagdish Rai Mittal, aged 46 years, resident of #335, Sector-12-A, Panchkula.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ….Complainant

Versus

1.     Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Limited, Shop No.16, Shiva Complex, Village Rally, Sector-12-A, Panchkula, through its       authorized representative.

2.     Chairman/Managing Director, Sahara India Bhawan, Registered Office, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024.

                                                                        ….Opposite Parties

                                                         

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,  2019.

 

Before:      Sh.Satpal, President.

Dr.Sushma Garg, Member.

Dr.Barhm Parkash Yadav, Member

 

 

Present:     Sh.J.S.Thakur, Advocate for complainant.

OP No.1 already ex-parte vide order dated 03.02.2022.

None for OP No.2.

 

 

(Per Satpal, President)  

 

1.The above mentioned complaint is fixed for submission of documentary evidence in the shape of affidavit etc. by OP No.2; The learned counsel for the complainant, at this stage, has prayed for its disposal as per the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in  I.A.No.56308 of 2023 in Writ Petition (C) No.191 of 2022 on 29.03.2023 in case titled as Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India and Ors.

2.Briefly stated, the facts as alleged in the present complaint, are that  the complainant had purchased one FDR bearing Certificate no.705002302708 receipt no.80851679088, for an amount of Rs. 11,000/-, from OP No.1 for a period of 12 months i.e. 02.12.2019 to 02.12.2020 with maturity amount of Rs.11,935/-. He also purchased another FDR vide receipt no.80792492483, certificate no. 925008717285, for an amount of Rs.1,10,000/-, from OP No.1 for a period of 18 months i.e. 15.12.2018 to 15.06.2020 with maturity amount of Rs.1,27,930/-. It is stated that the complainant being in dire need of liquidity, visited the office of OPs to seek the release of maturity amount qua FDRs but the OPs avoided to release the payment on one pretext or the other. Due to non payment by the OPs, the complainant has suffered a lot of mental agony and physical harassment and financial loss; hence, the present complaint.

3.Notice was issued to the OP No.1 through  process server, which was received with the report ‘served’  but none had appeared on behalf  of the OP No.1, thus, due to non appearance of OP No.1, it was proceeded ex-parte by this Commission vide its order dated 03.02.2022.

                Upon notice OP No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua complaint is not maintainable being false and frivolous; the complainant does not falls under the definition of the consumer and no jurisdiction. On merits, OPs stated that there is no relation of consumer and service provider between the complainant and OPs(hereinafter called as the society). It is also stated that complainant had himself visited the office of the OPs and became the member of the society to get benefits of the said scheme. As far as opening of the said scheme is concerned, the same is matter of record. The Society was always ready to make the payment as per the conditions of scheme, but due to enhance demand of interest of maturity amount the payment could not be made to the complainant at that time. There is valid arbitration agreement between the parties and OPs always works as per the terms of the agreement and byelaws of the society; hence, this Hon’ble Commission have no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP No.2 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

4. To prove the case, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-4 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement.

5.We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the entire record available on the file, minutely and carefully.

6.During the pendency of the afore-mentioned complaint, certain intervening and relevant facts, including the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana and UT State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT Chandigarh, have been brought to our notice, which have a material bearing on the cases in hand.

7.It is pertinent to mention here that some consumer complaints, involving similar question of facts and laws, has been decided by the Commission, in favour of the complainant, directing Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies to release the payment of maturity amount in favour of the depositor/complainant with interest and compensation. However, M/s Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, which is also a group of Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies, in certain other matters, approached the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana, High Court by way of filing the CWP No.5008 of 2022 and CWP No.6813 of 2022 disputing the relationship of a consumer and service provider between the depositors/ complainants on one hand and the Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited on the other hand. Keeping in view the interim orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court in said writ petitions, the Hon’ble State Commission UT, Chandigarh in execution application no.EA.116 OF 2021 in complaint case number CC-38 of 2020 titled as Ram Kumar Vs. Sahara India Pariwar Ltd. adjourned the matters Sine die to await the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.5008 of 2022 and other connected writ petitions.

8.The final decision settling the dispute as raised in the aforementioned writ petitions qua the relationship of a consumer and service provider may take a long time, preventing the implementation of the orders passed in consumer complaints against Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies.

9.Now, the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in Sahara connected matters have been brought to the notice of this Commission. Keeping in view the grievances of the depositors of the various schemes, floated by the Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies, an application no.56308 of 2023 was filed by the Union of India Ministry of Corporation in writ petition no.191 of 2022 titled as Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India & Ors. in the Hon’ble Apex Court seeking directions to transfer the amount of Rs.5,000/-crores out of utilized amount of Rs.23,937/-crores(lying in “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”) for onward disbursement  of the same to the genuine depositors of Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies. The Hon’ble Apex Court disposed of the said application vide its order dated 29.03.2023 by issuing several directions. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the relevant directions issued vide said orders at serial no.1, 2 & 4, are reproduced as under:-

1. Out of  the total amount of Rs.24,979.67 crores lying in the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”, Rs.5000crores be transferred  to the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, who in turn, shall disburse  the same against  the legitimate dues of the depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies, which shall be paid to the genuine depositors in the most transparent manner and on proper identification and on submitting proof of their deposits  and proof of their claims and to be deposited  in their respective bank account directly.
2. The disbursement shall be supervised and monitored by Justice R.Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of this Court with the able assistance of Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned Advocate, who is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist Justice R.Subhash Reddy as well as the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in disbursing the amount to the genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies. The manner and modalities for making the payment is to be worked out by the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in consultation with Justice R.Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of this Court and Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned Advocate.
3. –
4. We direct that the amount be paid to the respective genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies out of the aforesaid amount of Rs.5000crores at the earliest, but not later than nine months from today. The balance amount thereafter be again transferred to the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”.

10.The Hon’ble Apex Court, in the larger interest of depositors, has issued the above mentioned directions so as to bring uniformity in the redressal mechanism as also to enable the depositors to seek the refund of their deposited amount as early as possible. Pertinently, as per directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide its said order dated 29.03.2021, the manner and modalities for making disbursement of the deposited amount to the consumers is to be worked out by Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies under the guidelines of R.Subhash Reddy Former Judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Sh. Gaurav Aggarwal, Advocate. Moreover, the disbursement of the deposited amount, by various consumers/depositors in the schemes, floated by the Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies, shall be supervised and monitored by Justice R.Subhash Reddy Former Judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of Sh.Gaurav Aggarwal, the learned Advocate, who is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist justice R.Subhash Reddy as well as Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in disbursing the amount to the genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies.

11.The complainant, in the said complaint has sought the directions against OPs(Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies) to release the payment of the deposited amount in the schemes, floated by OPs.

12.After going through the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the firm and considered opinion that a holistic and wholesome view must be taken in order to provide practical relief to the complainant and prevent him from being engrossed in multiplicity of litigations, which would go against the very spirit of the Consumer Protection Act, which is a piece of benevolent legislation enacted to provide speedy and easy redressal of consumers grievances at nominal cost.

13.In our considered opinion, keeping in view  the totality of the facts and circumstances of the present complaint as also the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case(supra), it would serve the ends of justice, if the present complaint is disposed of with the directions to the complainant to approach the Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies for determination of his respective claims and thereafter, disbursement of the deposited amount to him by OPs; accordingly, the present complaint is disposed of with the directions to the complainant to submit the claim(s) before the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, along with all requirements, details of his bank accounts, documents of identification, proof of deposits etc. and Ops are directed to facilitate him to get the refund of the deposited amounts, as per the determination of the Registrar, Central Cooperative Societies under the supervision and monitoring of justice R. Subhash Reddy, Former judge of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India with the assistance of Shri Gaurav Aggarwal, learned Advocate appointed as Amicus Curiae in this matter. However,  with a Caveat, that in the event of the complainant’s grievance not being redressed in the above manner, the complainant will be entitled to institute a fresh complaint  on the same cause of action with updated facts and events before the competent Consumer Commission. The said complaint, if any filed, shall be considered and decided as per law. Needless to say, that the time spent in prosecution of the present  complaint  and in the prosecution of the claim before the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, will be liable to be excluded for the purpose of counting limitation for filing complaints as prescribed under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to all the parties and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced:20.09.2023

 

 

 

     Dr.Barhm Parkash Yadav            Dr.Sushma Garg            Satpal

                Member                            Member                 President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

   Satpal                            

                                          President