Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/759/2021

Krishan Mohan Jha - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Devinder Kumar

05 Dec 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/759/2021
Date of Institution	:	01/11/2021
Date of Decision	:	05/12/2022

 

Krishan Mohan Jha son of Sh. Yogendera Jha, aged about 46 years, r/o House No.211, Plot No.14, Baltana, SAS Nagar, Mohali.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Regd. Office : Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow 226024 through its Managing Director.
2. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, SCO No.1110-1111, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh, through its Regional Manager – Sh. Arun Kumar Singh.
3. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, 541/2, Keshoram Complex, Burail, Chandigarh through its Branch Manager – Sh. Hari Krishan.

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	SHRI PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	MRS. SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER

                               

                                       

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Devinder Kumar, Counsel for complainant
	:	Sh. Ishtneet Bhatia, Counsel for OPs.

Per Pawanjit Singh, President

1. The present consumer complaint has been filed by Sh.Krishan Mohan Jha, complainant against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as the OPs). The brief facts of the case are as under :-

1. It transpires from the allegations as projected in the consumer complaint that OP-1 company had floated various schemes and invited public at large to invest amount in the schemes whereby lucrative incentives and interest was offered and on the assurance of the OPs, complainant had invested hard earned money in one such scheme by depositing an amount of ₹40,327/- on 13.12.2018 vide receipt (Annexure C-1) for a period of 18 months, which was to be matured on 13.6.2020 with maturity value of ₹47,223/-. After the date of maturity, when the complainant approached the office of OPs for refund of the matured amount, he was informed that the said amount shall be transferred in his account. Since the said amount has not been transferred by the OPs in favour of complainant, the said act of the OPs amounts to deficiency in service on their part.  Thereafter the complainant had issued legal notice to the OPs on 4.10.2021, but, the same was not responded by them. OPs were requested several times to admit the claim, but, with no result. Hence, the present consumer complaint.
2. OPs resisted the consumer complaint and filed their written statement, inter alia, taking preliminary objections of maintainability, suppression of facts, jurisdiction and also that there is no relationship of consumer and service provider between the parties as complainant was a member of the Society, hence the consumer complaint of the complainant is not maintainable. On merits, stated that the complainant after understanding the byelaws and objects of the society had availed the membership and deposited the amount. It is denied that OPs had assured the complainant that he will get any benefit or that the company will pay interest on the delay of payment. It is averred that the complainant should approach the appropriate authority i.e. Central Registrar against any grievances or should apply under arbitration clause. Even this Commission at Chandigarh has no jurisdiction to try the consumer complaint.  It is denied that the OPs have caused any loss or harassment to the complainant or that there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part. The cause of action set up by the complainant is denied.  The consumer complaint is sought to be contested.

1. In replication, complainant re-asserted his claim put forth in the consumer complaint and prayer has been made that the consumer complaint be allowed as prayed for.

2. In order to prove their case, parties have tendered/proved their evidence by way of respective affidavits and supporting documents.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the file carefully, including written arguments.  
   1. At the very outset, it may be observed that when it is an admitted case of the parties that complainant had deposited an amount of ₹40,327/- with the OPs in the shape of FDR (Annexure C-1)  under the scheme tenure of 18 months which was to mature on 13.6.2020, the case is reduced to a narrow compass as it is to be determined if the complainant is entitled for the matured amount alongwith interest from the OPs, as is the case of the complainant, or if the consumer complaint of the complainant, being false and frivolous, deserves dismissal, as is the defence of the OPs.
   2. Annexure C-1 is the copy of certificate issued by the OPs as per which complainant had deposited an amount of ₹40,327/- with the OPs on 13.12.2018 for a period of 18 months and the said amount was to mature to ₹47,223/- upon maturity on 13.6.2020.  Admittedly, the said amount has not been paid by the OPs to the complainant till date though the OPs have no right to retain the amount after the date of maturity.  Not only this, when it has come on record that the complainant had deposited the aforesaid amount after being allured of good returns and even after maturity of said invested amount, the maturity amount was not paid to him, it is clear on record that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs and they are liable to refund the said amount alongwith interest and compensation.
   3. The OPs have resisted the claim of the complainant on the ground that this Commission has no jurisdiction to try the consumer complaint as per Section 84 of the Multi State Cooperative Society Act, 2002 and also on account of bar under the Arbitration Act.  So far as the defence of the OPs that the jurisdiction of this Commission is barred under the 2002 Act is concerned, the same is without merit as the complainant has been claiming the amount, whatever was deposited by him with the OPs in the shape of fixed deposit, which has also not been disputed by the OPs. 
   4. Similarly, the provisions of Arbitration Act do not affect the jurisdiction of this Commission as it was held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Emaar MGF Land Limited Vs. Aftaab, 2018 Online SCC 2378 that consumer disputes are non arbitrable.
   5. As far as the defence of the OPs that the consumer complaint of the complainant is not maintainable as there was no relationship of consumer and service provider between the parties and the complainant should approach the Central Registrar as this Commission has no jurisdiction to try the consumer complaint and also that the complainant is not a consumer under the Act is concerned, the same is also not tenable in view of the order passed by the Hon’ble National Commission in the case of SMC Global Securities Ltd. Vs. Anil Kasliwal & 2 Ors., III (2022) CPJ 224 (NC) in which the Hon’ble National Commission held as under :-

“(i) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Sections 2 (1)(d), 21 (b) – Consumer – Fixed deposit – Deposit of money in a Fixed Deposit Account cannot be termed as “commercial transaction.” – Submission of petitioner that complainants are not “consumers” is rejected.”

4. In the light of aforesaid discussion, the complainant has successfully proved that there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs and the present consumer complaint partly succeeds, the same is hereby partly allowed and OPs are directed as under :-

1. to pay the maturity amount of ₹47,223/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of maturity i.e. 13.6.2020 till realization of the same.
2. to pay an amount of ₹15,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
3. to pay ₹10,000/-  to the complainant as costs of litigation.

5. This order be complied with by the OPs within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
6. Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed.
7. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

Announced 05/12/2022 hg			Sd/-  [Pawanjit Singh] President
			Sd/-  [Surjeet Kaur] Member