Punjab

Sangrur

CC/349/2019

Joginder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.S.S.Ratol

05 Apr 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SANGRUR .

                                                                         Complaint No. 349

  Instituted on:   16.07.2019

                                                                         Decided on:     05.04.2021

 

 

Joginder Singh son of Pritam Singh, resident of Ward No.2, Chahlan Patti, Bhawanigarh, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur.

                                                          …. Complainant.     

                                                 Versus

1.     Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Registered Office: Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow through its Managing Director. 

2.             Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, Registered Office: 195, Zone I, in front of D.B. Mall, MP Nagar, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh) 462011 through its Managing Director.

3.             Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Branch Office: Main Bazar, Char Khamba Market, Bhawanigarh, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur through its Branch Manager.

             ….Opposite parties. 

For the complainant    : Shri S.S.Ratol, Adv.              

For the OPs               : Shri Sanjeev Goyal &Udit Goyal, Adv.

 

Quorum                                           

Shri Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

Shri Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

 

ORDER BY:     

Shri Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President.

1.             Shri Joginder Singh complainant has filed this complaint pleading that the complainant availed the services of the opposite parties by investing an amount of Rs.42,486/- in the shape of FDR  under Super BB Plan bearing number 085-000672446 on 6.2.2016 for three years with its maturity date as 6.2.2019 and the Ops were liable to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.65,258/- on its maturity. Further case of the complainant is that the complainant approached the Ops and requested OP number 2 to release the maturity amount, but the amount was not paid despite approaching the Ops. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops,  the complainant has prayed that the Opposite parties be directed to release the amount of FDR i.e. Rs.65,258/- along with interest and to pay Rs.50,000/- on account of mental torture, agony, inconvenience and an amount of Rs.22,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

2.             After the notice being served upon the opposite parties, the opposite parties appeared and filed written version.

3.             In written version filed by OP number 2, preliminary objections were taken up on the grounds that the complainant is not a consumer of opposite parties and that the OP number 2 has no concern with the OPs number 1 and 3. that  if the complainant is a member of the society and has any grievance or dispute with the society, the complainant is bound to refer her dispute before Arbitrator as per Arbitration agreement under clause 11.

4.             On merits, it is submitted that only a member of society can avail the benefits of society and the complainant after understanding the bye-laws and objects of the society had become member and invested an amount of Rs.42,486/-  on 6.2.2016 for 36 months. It is stated that the complainant never approached the OPs for release of the due payment.  It is stated further that the complainant is duty bound to prove the case by way of relevant documents before the Commission. Further it is stated that there is no consumer dispute as the complainant is not a consumer of the opposite parties.  There is no relation of consumer and service provider between the complainant and the opposite parties. It is stated further that the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed by him from this Commission except the maturity amount payable as per terms and conditions of the scheme.   

5.             In reply filed by Ops number 1 and 3,  preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is false and frivolous and that the OPs have no concern with the OP number 2. On merits, all the allegations leveled in the complaint have been denied in toto and it is stated that the complainant is not a consumer of the OPs.

6.             The learned counsel for the parties produced their respective evidence before this Commission in the shape of documents and affidavits.

7.             The learned counsel for the complainant has contended that the complainant availed the services of the opposite parties by investing an amount of Rs.42,486/- vide FDR number 085-000672446 with its maturity on 6.2.2019 and amount payable was to the tune of Rs.65,258/-. Further it is contended that the complainant approached the Ops and requested OP number 2 to release the maturity amount of the FDR, but the amount was not paid despite approaching the Ops as such it is stated that the Ops are deficient in rendering service to the complainant. On the other hand, the Ops have admitted the deposit of the amount of Rs.42,486/- by the complainant but the amount was not paid.  It is contended by the learned counsel for the OPs that the complainant is not a consumer of the OPs nor this is a consumer dispute.

8.             It is proved on record that the complainant deposited with the opposite parties a total amount of Rs.42,486/- vide receipt Ex.C-2 in Sahara Super BB Plan, but there is no mention that the OPs are liable to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.65,258/- after the period of three years of its deposit. Further it is denied by the Ops that the complainant was entitled to get an amount of Rs.65,258/-. From the perusal of entire documents we find that the complainant has miserably failed to produce any cogent and reliable document showing that the complainant is entitled to get an amount of Rs.65,258/-. Rather the OPs have produced on record copy of account statement Ex.OP-2 which shows that the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.42,486/- with the OP number 2. In the circumstances, we feel that the ends of justice would be met if the OP 2 directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.42,486/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of deposit till realization.

9.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct OP number 2 to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.42,486/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of deposit i.e. 6.2.2016 till its realization.  It is further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.2500/- as lump sum compensation for mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses.  This order be complied with by the opposite parties within 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

10.            A certified copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost as per rules. File be consigned to records.

                                Pronounced.

       

                                          April 5, 2021.

 

             (Vinod Kumar Gulati)             (Jasjit Singh Bhinder)

                         Member                           President