Punjab

Sangrur

CC/150/2019

Rajiv Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Sh.G.S.Shergill

04 Jan 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SANGRUR .

                                                                         Complaint No. 150

 Instituted on:   08.04.2019

                                                                         Decided on:     04.01.2021

 

 

Rajiv Kumar son of Jagan Nath, resident of Village Khanal Kalan, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur.

                                                          …. Complainant.     

                                                 Versus

1.     Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Registered Office: Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow through its Managing Director 226 024.

2.        Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Branch Office; Main Bazar, Char Khamba Market, Bhawanigarh, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur through its Branch Manager 148 026.

             ….Opposite parties. 

 

For the complainant    : Shri G.S.Shergill, Adv.              

For the OPs               : Shri Udit Goyal, Adv.

 

 

Quorum                                           

Shri Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

Shri Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

 

ORDER BY:     

Shri Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President.

1.             Shri Rajiv Kumar, complainant filed this complaint pleading that the complainant availed the services of the opposite parties by investing an amount of Rs.32,000/- vide different policies/FDRs vide number from 0925-000277035 to 925-000277036 of Rs.16,000/- each in favour of the complainant with its maturity on 23.6.2017 and amount payable was to the tune of Rs.37,760/-. 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 FDRs i.e. Rs.37,760/- 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 through Advocate Shri Udit Goyal and filed written version. In written version taking preliminary objections that the complainant is not a consumer of opposite parties and 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.

3.             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.32,000/- in total  on 23.12.2015 for 18 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 Forum except the maturity amount payable as per terms and conditions of the scheme.   

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

5.             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.

6.             The learned counsel for the complainant has contended that the complainant availed the services of the opposite parties by investing an amount of Rs.32,000/- vide different policies/FDRs vide number from 925-000277035 and 925-000277036 Rs.16,000/- each in favour of the complainant. Further it is contended that the complainant approached the Ops and requested OP number 2 to release the maturity amount of the FDRs, 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.32,000/- 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, as such the learned counsel for the OPs have contended that this complaint should be dismissed. But we are unable to accept such a contention of the learned counsel for the OPs. 

7.             It is proved on record that the complainant deposited with the opposite parties a total amount of Rs.32,000/- vide receipts Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-3  and the maturity amount payable to the complainant was to the tune of Rs.37,760/- but the opposite parties failed to pay the due maturity amount along with interest.  Though the stand of the opposite parties is that the complainant is not a consumer but we are of the considered view that the opposite parties are liable to pay to the complainant  the maturity amount of Rs.37,760/-. As such,  the opposite parties are deficient in service by not paying the requisite amount to the complainant.

8.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the Ops to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.37,760/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of maturity till realization.  It is further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5000/- as compensation for mental agony, harassment and further an amount of Rs.5000/- on account of 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.

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

                        Pronounced.

 

                        January 4, 2021.

 

             (Vinod Kumar Gulati)             (Jasjit Singh Bhinder)

                         Member                           President