DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SANGRUR.

                                                          Complaint No. 484

                                                          Instituted on:   26.11.2018

                                                          Decided on:     01.03.2021

Leela Wanti @ Lila Wani aged about 62 years wife of Partap Chand resident of House No.188, Gali Choprawali, Ward No.13, Sangrur Tehsil and District Sangrur.

                                                …. Complainant.      

                                         Versus

1.     Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd. Sunami Gate Phirni, Near Ganga Ram Chawla House, Sangrur through its Branch Manager.

2.     Sahara Credit Cooperatvive Society Ltd. Regd. Office: Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kaapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow through its Managing Director.

          ….Opposite parties.

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:     Shri M.K.Satija, Advocate                          

FOR OPP. PARTIES              :             Shri Sanjeev Goyal,Adv.         

Quorum:   Shri Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

                Shri V.K.Gulati, Member   

ORDER:  

Shri Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

FACTS

1.             Leela Wanti @ Lila Wani, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that she availed the services of the OPs by investing a total amount of Rs.18000/-(Rs.300/- every month) under  Sahara.M.Benefit scheme on 13.04.2013. The date of maturity of the said scheme was 31.03.2018 and maturity value of the policy is Rs.22500/-. After due date of said scheme the complainant fulfill all the requirements for releasing the amount. The complainant requested the OPs so many times to release the maturity amount but they failed to do so. 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 scheme i.e. Rs.22500/- along with interest and to pay Rs.40,000/- on account of mental torture, agony, inconvenience and an amount of Rs.30,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

WRITTEN VERSION

2.             In reply filed by the Ops, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complainant is not a consumer as the complainant is a member of the society and if any member of the society has any grievance then he should go to the arbitrator for arbitration. On merits, it is stated that the complainant being the member of the society vide membership number 63071300122 had chosen to invest amount in Sahara M Benefit Plan at Franchise office Sangrur. It is further submitted that the maturity value of accounts was as per the terms and conditions of scheme. The complainant demanded additional interest after date of maturity but no additional interest is payable to the complainant after the date of maturity. As such there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

EVIDENCE AND FINDINGS

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

4.             We have gone through the pleadings of the parties and documents placed on record by the parties as well as heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

5.             The learned counsel for the complainant has contended that the complainant availed the services of the opposite parties in the month of December, 2013 by investing a total amount of Rs.18000/- (Rs.300/-every month) for five years  under Sahara-M- Benefit. Further it is contended that the complainant approached the OPs and requested OP number 1 to release the maturity amount of the said scheme, 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 a total amount of Rs.18000/- (Rs.300/- every month) for five years under Sahara-M-Benefit Plan by the complainant.

6.             It is proved on record that the complainant deposited with the opposite parties a total amount of Rs.18,000/- under Sahara-M-Benefit vide copy of pass book Ex.C-2.   Though the stand of the opposite parties is that the complainant is not a consumer but it is denied that the complainant was entitled to get an amount of Rs.22500/-. 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.22500/-. In the circumstances, we feel that the ends of justice would be met if the Ops are directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.18000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of deposit till realization.

7.             Accordingly, in view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the Opposite parties to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.18000/-  along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of deposit of respective amounts  till realization in full.  It is further directed to pay to the complainant a lump sum compensation of Rs.10,000/- 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. A certified copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost as per rules. File be consigned to records.

                        Announced.

                        March 1, 2021

                (Vinod Kumar Gulati)                (Jasjit Singh Bhinder)

                         Member                                 President

        BBS/-