Punjab

Bhatinda

CC/20/201

Mahesh Garg - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sahil Bansal

11 Apr 2023

ORDER

Final Order of DISTT.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, Court Room No.19, Block-C,Judicial Court Complex, BATHINDA-151001 (PUNJAB)
PUNJAB
 
Complaint Case No. CC/20/201
( Date of Filing : 02 Sep 2020 )
 
1. Mahesh Garg
Shri Ram Building, Bhucho Mandi, Distt. Bathinda
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Ltd
Opp Hotel Amsun Pride, Amrik Singh Road, Bathinda-151001
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Lalit Mohan Dogra PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Shivdev Singh MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Sahil Bansal, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 11 Apr 2023
Final Order / Judgement

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BATHINDA

 

C.C.No.201 of 02.09.2020

Decided on :11-04-2023

 

Mahesh Garg aged about 48 years S/o Sh. Kewal Krishan Garg, R/o # Siri Ram Building, Bhucho Mandi, Distt. Bathinda (Punjab) – 151101.

........Complainant

Versus

 

  1. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Opp. Hotel Amsun Pride, Amrik Singh Road, Bathinda- 151001 through its Auth. Signatory/ Manager/ Incharge/ Director.

  2. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Regd. Office: Sahara India Bhawan,1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024 through its Manager/ Auth. Signatory/ Director.

  3. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Sethi Complex, Opp. Polo Ground, Near Modi College Chowk, Lower Mall, 3rd Floor, Patiala-147001, through its Auth. Signatory (Ramesh Yadav) / Manager/ Incharge/ Director.

.......Opposite parties

 

Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

 

 

QUORUM

Sh. Lalit Mohan Dogra, President

Sh. Shivdev Singh, Member

Present :

 

For the complainant : Sh. Sahil Bansal, Advocate.

For opposite parties : Sh. R.K Duggal, Advocate.

 

ORDER

 

Lalit Mohan Dogra, President

 

  1. The complainant Mahesh Garg (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, (here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this Commission against Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., and others (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties).

  2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the opposite parties in 2004 launched scheme for selling the flats and plot in the name of Sahara India Pariwar. The father of the complainant applied with the opposite parties under that scheme but later the opposite parties failed to provide the flats and plot and converted the payment in the shape of FDR's with assured interest @ 12% with compounding interest in the name of the complainant which is called Sahara Special Fix Scheme (Fixed Investment Scheme). The opposite parties issued the FDR in March 2016 in the name of Kewal Krishan Garg, father of the complainant, for the amount of Rs.6,79,000/- under scheme Sahara a Select SCCSL. with four instruments i.e. Rs. 2.00 Lacs vide 3 instruments and 1 instrument of Rs. 79,000/- and FDR Instruments Nos. 080 570329883 to 9886.

  3. It is alleged that in 2018, Kewal Krishan Garg transfer the above said FDR's in the name of his son Mahesh Garg i.e. complainant and the opposite issued receipts on 4.4.2018 for the amount of Rs.2,45,489/- X 3 = Rs.7,36,467/- and Rs.96,968/- which includes interest upto 4.4.2018 and also issued the FDR's w.e.f. 4.4.2018 of the above said amount under Sahara Special Fix Scheme (Fixed Investment Schemes) for the amount of Rs.2,45,489/- (FDR No.787 002146353), Rs.2,45,489/- (FDR No.787 00246354), Rs.2,45,489/- (FDR No.787 002146355) and Rs.96,968/- (FDR No.787 002146356) i.e.Rs.2,45,289/- x 3= 7,36,467/- + Rs.96,968/- = 8,33,435/- for 18 months with maturity on 4.1.2019 for Rs.2,87,468/- x3 =8,62,404/- and Rs.1,13,550/- which comes total Rs. 8,62,404/- +Rs.1,13,550/- =9,75,954/-. The opposite parties promised/assured to release the payment i.e. maturity amount along with 11% interest.

  4. It is alleged that thereafter complainant approached the opposite parties in the month of October 2019 and demanded the aforesaid amount of Rs.9,75,954/-/- along with uptodate interest and the opposite parties assured that total payment will be released alongwith up-to-date interest 11% within 1 month, but the opposite parties till date not released the said payment and the amount is still lying with the opposite parties. The opposite parties illegally gaining the profits by using the above said amount of the complainant which is still lying with the opposite parties. The complainant made several requests to the opposite parties to release the amount along with interest but the opposite parties lingering on the matter.

  5. On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to pay maturity amount of Rs.9,75,954/-,(Rs.2,87,468/- x3 = 8,62,404/- + Rs.1,13,550/- matured on 4.10.2019) alongwith interest 18% p.a. with compounding interest w.e.f 4.10.2019 and damages to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of mental agony and pains besides Rs.50,000/- as litigation expenses.

  6. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply raising preliminary objections that complainant is not consumer. There is no relation of consumer and service provider between the complainant and the opposite parties. The opposite parties are Society duly registered under "Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002" and the complainant is a member of Society. Thus relation between the complainant and opposite parties is of Member and Society. There is no company eixist with name of opposite parties No 2 & 3. Therefore complaint is defective for misjoinder of unnecessary party. If the complainant who is a member of the Society has any grievance or dispute with the Society, the complainant is bound to refer his dispute before Arbitrator as per clause 11 of the terms & condition of the contribution of the scheme SaharaCreidt Coopwerative society Limited.

  7. On merits, opposite parties have pleaded that they never made resquest to reinvest the amount. The complainant himself approached the office of the opposite parties for further investment. The opposite parties are multipurpose co-operative society registered under Multi State Co-operative societies Act 2002. The opposite parties are not collecting the funds from General Public for the purpose of investment. Rather the members of the society made contribution in the society.

  8. The opposite parties further pleaded that complainant being member of Society with memberships/certificates Nos.787002146353, 787002146354, 787002146355, 787002146356 had choosen scheme Sahara Special Select at authorised centre Khanna and Regional Ludhiana City-2 to make investment in furtherance of the objects of Society and on 4.4.2018. The complainant himself approached the company to take the good benefit. The payment, if any, was strictly payable as per terms & conditions of the contribution. It is submitted that under Sahara credit society scheme, there is no provision of maturity or pre-maturity payment. The complainant has made false and baseless statement.

  9. It has also been pleaded that the complainant before opting contribution scheme of Sahara Special "A" select, duly understood the terms and conditions of the scheme. Being a member of Society, he had contributed the amount for the furtherance of the objects of Society on 30.04.2018 vide under membership/certificate No. 78002146353 to 78002146356 at Khanna Region, Ludhiana City-2. Under Contribution scheme, there is no provision of maturity or pre-maturity payment. Further, scheme does not provide interest over the contributed amount. After controverting all other averments of the complainant, the opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint.

  10. In support of his complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 28.8.2020 (Ex.C-1) and the documents (Ex. C-2 to Ex. C-5).

  11. In order to rebut the evidence of complainant, the opposite parties have tendered into evidence affidavit of Rameshwer Gupta dated 24.11.2021 (Ex. OP-1/1) and close the evidence.

  12. The learned counsel for the parties reiterated their stand as pleaded in their respectiving pleadings.

  13. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the file carefully.

  14. It is submitted by learned counsel for complainant that receipt of amount is admitted. This version is only afterthought version to delay refund of amount.

  15. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties has submitted that the payment was never denied to the complainant. He is not entitled to any interest after maturity period.

  16. Counsel for the opposite parties further argued that there is no relation of consumer and service provider between the complainant and the opposite parties and as such, complaint is not maintainable before this Commission and the second objection raised by the counsel for the opposite parties is that as per Clause '11' of terms & conditions of contribution of the scheme Sahara Credit Coperative Society Limited, all disputes between society and member of the society are required to be referreed to the Arbitrator. This argument of the counsel for the opposite parties has no force as Arbitration and Consideration Act does not bar the jurisdiction of Consumer Commission. Even opposite parties have not produced any agreement or document signed by complainant and representative of the opposite parties to this effect that parties shall be governed by Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002 as well as provisions of Arbitration and Consideration Act. As such, complainant has rightfully approached this Commission for redressal of his grievances. Moreover, in the written statement and evidence on record, there is not even a single word as to why the opposite parties are not ready to refund the amounts received from the complainant.

  17. The complainant has pleaded that he invested amounts, which were to mature on 4.10.2019. The complainant has asserted that opposite parties have failed to refund the amount. Hence failure on the part of the opposite parties for not refunding the amount deposited by the complainant without any reasonable cause amounts to deficiency in service on their part.

  18. For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is partly accepted with Rs.5000/- as cost and compensation against opposite parties. Opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.9,75,954/-, maturity value of FDR's which matured on 4.10.2019. As opposite parties have delayed the payment, the complainant is also entitled to interest @ 12% per annum on amount of Rs.9,75,954/- from 4.10.2019 till realization. Opposite parties are at liberty to get filled up any form from the complainant, if so required for release of payment to him.

  19. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

  20. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.

 

 

 

 

  1. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

    Announced:-

    11-04-2023

     

    1. (Lalit Mohan Dogra)

    President

     

     

    (Shivdev Singh)

    Member

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Lalit Mohan Dogra]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Shivdev Singh]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.