Delhi

North East

CC/16/2019

Mrs. Ragini Saxena - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

29 Aug 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No.16/19

 

 

In the matter of:

 

	Mrs. Ragini Saxena W/o Sh. Mahender Kumar Saxena, R/o D-109A, Gali No. 3, Bhajanpura, Delhi 110053	Complainant
	Versus
	Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Through its Director D-57/1, Main Yamuna Vihar Road, Adarsh Market, North Ghonda Delhi 110053 Also At: Sahara India Bhawan 1, Kapporthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow 226024	Opposite Party

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:         JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                         DATE OF ORDER  :

01.02.2019 13.03.2023 29.08.2023

 

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Adarsh Nain, Member

 

ORDER

 

Adarsh Nain, Member

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that the Complainant had purchased two FDs from the Opposite Party. First FD of Sahara A Select A/c No. 2122560118 on 15.12.2015 for a total sum of Rs. 4,37,000/- for a period of 36 months which stands matured on 15.12.2018. The Second FD of Sahara A Select A/c no. 21226700317 on 31.12.2016 for a total sum of Rs. 3,97,000/- for a period of 18 months which stands matured on 30.06.2018. Complainant stated that she submitted her original documents pertaining the the second FD to the Opposite Party as per their requirement for release of Rs. 4,61,711/-. Opposite Party only  released an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- and sought time to release remaining amount of Rs. 3,61,711/- with interest within a period of 30 days. It is her case that despite receiving all the documents the Opposite Party did not release the remaining amount till date. On 15.12.2018, the staff of the Opposite Party had refused to release the remaining amount and threatened the Complainant. Complainant further stated that since the other FD of Sahara A Select also stands matured on 15.12.2018, the Complainant submitted original documents pertaining to said FD and requested to release the matured amount of Rs. 5,89,600/-. But Opposite Party did not release the amount. It is her case that op refused to release the due amount. Complainant further stated that Complainant had already handed over the above noted FDs and claim form as well as bank details to the Opposite Party but the Opposite Party did not give any response. Hence, there is a deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party. Complainant has prayed for refund of a sum of Rs. 9,51,311/- along with interest @ 12 % and Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of mental harassment. Complainant also prayed for Rs. 21,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

Case of the Opposite Party

2. Opposite Party contested the case and filed its written statement. It is stated that the Opposite Party while admitting that Complainant had deposited the amount as mentioned in the complaint, has raised the objection that it is a Society and the complaint is not maintainable before this Commission. The activities of the society do not fall within the definition of service under consumer Act. It is also contended by the Opposite Party that Complainant must be put to strict proof of his claims and the Complainant is not entitled to any relief. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

Rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party

3. The Complainant filed rejoinder along with affidavit to the written statement of Opposite Party wherein the Complainant has denied the pleas raised by the Opposite Party and has reiterated the assertion made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Complainant

4. The Complainant in support of her case filed her affidavit wherein she has supported the assertions made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Opposite Party

5. Despite being afforded sufficient time, Opposite Party failed to file their evidence by way of affidavit, hence, their defence was closed vide order dated 10.10.2022.

Arguments & Conclusion

6. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant. We have also perused the file and evidence of the Complainant.
7. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant had purchased two FDs from the Opposite Party which stood matured on 15.12.2018 and 30.06.2018 respectively. It is stated that under the first FD, out of matured amount of  Rs. 4,61,711/- Opposite Party only  released an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- and sought time to release remaining amount of Rs. 3,61,711/- with interest within a period of 30 days. So far as the second FD is concerned it is alleged that the Opposite Party had not paid the entire matured amount which is Rs. 5,89,600/-. It is her case that despite receiving all the documents pertaining to both the FDs, the Opposite Party did not release the remaining amount till date.
8. As Opposite Party has failed to file their evidence in support of their version, we are left with no option except to believe the version of the Complainant which is testified on oath. Moreover, it is admitted fact that the Complainant had deposited the alleged amount which got matured and the Opposite Party only released Rs.100,000/-to the Complainant.
9. It is to be noted that the Opposite Party has raised the objection that the complaint was not maintainable as per the provisions of the Co-operative Act and also there is not relationship of Consumer with the Complainant. However, the Opposite Party has not led any evidence in support of their case. 
10. In view of above discussion and the unrebutted and uncontroverted testimony of the Complainant regarding the deficiency of services on the part of Opposite Party, we are of the considered view that the Opposite Party has been deficient in services by not providing the satisfactory services to the Complainant.
11. Thus , we allow the present complaint.
12. It is to be noted that during the pendency of the matter, on 09.12.2019, the parties arrived at settlement and Opposite Party offered to pay to the Complainant total amount of Rs.9,51,311 with interest to be paid in instalments. It is clear from the perusal of the proceedings that the Opposite Party had paid Rs. 7,09,787 out of Rs.9,51,311/- (Total Agreed amount) till 19.10.2020 and Rs.2,41,524/- still remained due.
13. In view of above, Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs. 2,41,524/- along with interest @ 6 % p.a. from 01.11.2020 till its recovery. The Opposite Party shall also pay an amount of Rs. 25,000 /- to the Complainant on account of litigation expenses and harassment along with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of this order till its recovery. 
14. Order announced on 29.08.2023.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost

File be consigned to Record Room.

(Adarsh Nain)		(Surinder Kumar Sharma)
(Member)		(President)