Haryana

Panchkula

CC/372/2020

KUSUM . - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAHARA CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

HARISH MARHIA

21 Sep 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  PANCHKULA.

 

 

Consumer Complaint No	:	372 of 2020
Date of Institution	:	07.12.2020
Date of Decision	:	21.09.2023

 

Kusum w/o Sh.Kailash Gaur,aged about 38 years, resident of House No.196, Village-Abheypur, Industrial Area, Phase-1, Panchkula, Haryana.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ….Complainant

Versus

1.     Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Sahara India Bhawan, # Kapoorthala Complex, Aligang, Lucknow- 226024, U.P..

2.     Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, SCO No.1110-1111, Sector-22B, Chandigarh through its Branch Manager.

3.     Franchisee Head, Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, C/o M/s Sahara India, Office no.16, Shiva Shopping Complex, Railly, Sector-12A, Panchkula-131112, Haryana.

4.     Sh. Sanjay Dubey, S/o Sh. Indrasan Dubey, Local Collection Agent, SCO No.1110-1111, Sector-22B, Chandigarh.       

….Opposite Parties

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,  2019.

 

Before:      Sh.Satpal, President.

Dr.Sushma Garg, Member.  

Dr.Barhm Parkash Yadav, Member.

 

Present:     Sh. Harish Marhia, Advocate for the complainant.

                None for the OPs No.1 to 3.

                Sh. Arjun Kundra, Advocate for OP No.4.        

ORDER

(Per Satpal, President)  

1.The above mentioned complaint is fixed for arguments.; The learned counsel for the complainant, at this stage, has prayed for its disposal as per the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in  I.A.No.56308 of 2023 in Writ Petition (C) No.191 of 2022 on 29.03.2023 in case titled as Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India and Ors.

2.Briefly stated, the facts as alleged in the complaint, are that the OP No.4 and officials of OP no.3 on behalf of the OPs No.1 & 2 approached the complainant, in the year 2014, requesting her to deposit the amount in the investment scheme belonging to the Ops No.1 & 2 and upon their persuasion, she became a member of the scheme and deposited the amount on daily-wise basis. The tenure of the scheme was four years wherein the complainant had made the payment of Rs.96,000/- on daily basis with the OPs. It is alleged that after the maturity of the investment scheme, the complainant had been visiting the office of OPs seeking the release of the maturity amount in her favour but the OPs had been avoiding the release of the payment on one pretext or the other. She visited the local office of OPs several times and made repeated requests but the no heed was paid by OPs to her request. On 15.12.2018, rather paying money to the complainant, the Ops without the consent of the complainant, had put her money into their another Fixed Deposit Scheme, vide receipt no.80797524739, membership no.23971402923, which had to be matured on 15.06.2020 wherein the maturity amount was Rs.1,11,648/-. Due to non payment by the OPs, the complainant has suffered a lot of mental agony and physical harassment and financial loss; hence, the present complaint.  

3.Upon notice, OPs No.1 to 3 appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua complainant is not a consumer of the Ops and there is no relation of consumer and service provider between the complainant and the Ops. It is submitted that Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Ltd. is duly registered under “Multi State Cooperative Society Act, 2002” and the complainant is a member of the society; thus relation between the complainant and the OPs is of a member and the society. Therefore, for any dispute between society and member, complaint is not maintainable. There is a valid arbitration agreement between the parties and OPs always works as per the terms of the agreement and byelaws of the society. This Commission has no jurisdiction to try the dispute arising between co-operative society and its members. On merits, it is stated that complainant had self visited at the office of the Ops and became the member of the society to get benefits of the said scheme. As far as opening of the said scheme is concerned, the same is matter or record. It is submitted that the society was always ready to make the payment as per conditions of the scheme but due to demand of enhanced interest on maturity amount, the payment could not be made to the complainant at that time. There is no deficiency on part of the OPs. The demand raised by the complainant for enhanced rate of interest on the maturity amount was beyond the scheme and scope of the agreement; So there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

                Upon notice, the OP No.4 appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua complaint is not maintainable; the complainant has not come with cleans hands and suppressed true material facts; the complainant does not fall under the category of consumer; no cause of action has arisen in favour of the complainant. On merits, it is stated that the OP no.4 collected the amount from the complainant and thereafter deposited the same with the company and proper receipt were provided to the complainant. It is submitted that the OP No.4 is collection agent of the OPs No.1 to 3. It is submitted that OP No.4 had never given any assurance as alleged in the para no.3 of the complaint and as such, it has been prayed for dismissal of the present complaint. 

 4.The complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 & C-15 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs No.1 to 3 by making a separate statement, stated that the written statement filed on 22.06.2021 may be read into evidence on behalf of the OPs No.1 to 3 and closed the evidence. The learned counsel for OP No.4 has tendered affidavit as Annexure R-4/A into evidence and closed the evidence.

5.We have heard the learned counsels for the complainant as well as OP No.4 and gone through the entire record available on file, including written arguments filed by the complainant, OPs No.1 to 3 and OP No.4, minutely and carefully.

6.During the pendency of the afore-mentioned complaint, certain intervening and relevant facts, including the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana and UT State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT Chandigarh, have been brought to our notice, which have a material bearing on the cases in hand.

7.It is pertinent to mention here that some consumer complaints, involving similar question of facts and laws, has been decided by the Commission, in favour of the complainant, directing Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies to release the payment of maturity amount in favour of the depositor/complainant with interest and compensation. However, M/s Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, which is also a group of Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies, in certain other matters, approached the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana, High Court by way of filing the CWP No.5008 of 2022 and CWP No.6813 of 2022 disputing the relationship of a consumer and service provider between the depositors/complainants on one hand and the Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited on the other hand. Keeping in view the interim orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court in said writ petitions, the Hon’ble State Commission UT, Chandigarh in execution application no.EA.116 OF 2021 in complaint case number CC-38 of 2020 titled as Ram Kumar Vs. Sahara India Pariwar Ltd. adjourned the matters Sine die to await the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.5008 of 2022 and other connected writ petitions.

8.The final decision settling the dispute as raised in the aforementioned writ petitions qua the relationship of a consumer and service provider may take a long time, preventing the implementation of the orders passed in consumer complaints against Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies.

9.Now, the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in Sahara connected matters have been brought to the notice of this Commission. Keeping in view the grievances of the depositors of the various schemes, floated by the Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies, an application no.56308 of 2023 was filed by the Union of India Ministry of Corporation in writ petition no.191 of 2022 titled as Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India & Ors. in the Hon’ble Apex Court seeking directions to transfer the amount of Rs.5,000/-crores out of utilized amount of Rs.23,937/-crores(lying in “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”) for onward disbursement  of the same to the genuine depositors of Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies. The Hon’ble Apex Court disposed of the said application vide its order dated 29.03.2023 by issuing several directions. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the relevant directions issued vide said orders at serial no.1, 2 & 4, are reproduced as under:-

1. Out of  the total amount of Rs.24,979.67 crores lying in the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”, Rs.5000crores be transferred  to the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, who in turn, shall disburse  the same against  the legitimate dues of the depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies, which shall be paid to the genuine depositors in the most transparent manner and on proper identification and on submitting proof of their deposits  and proof of their claims and to be deposited  in their respective bank account directly.
2. The disbursement shall be supervised and monitored by Justice R.Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of this Court with the able assistance of Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned Advocate, who is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist Justice R.Subhash Reddy as well as the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in disbursing the amount to the genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies. The manner and modalities for making the payment is to be worked out by the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in consultation with Justice R.Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of this Court and Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned Advocate.
3. –
4. We direct that the amount be paid to the respective genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies out of the aforesaid amount of Rs.5000crores at the earliest, but not later than nine months from today. The balance amount thereafter be again transferred to the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”.

10.The Hon’ble Apex Court, in the larger interest of depositors, has issued the above mentioned directions so as to bring uniformity in the redressal mechanism as also to enable the depositors to seek the refund of their deposited amount as early as possible. Pertinently, as per directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide its said order dated 29.03.2021, the manner and modalities for making disbursement of the deposited amount to the consumers is to be worked out by Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies under the guidelines of R.Subhash Reddy Former Judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Sh.Gaurav Aggarwal, Advocate. Moreover, the disbursement of the deposited amount, by various consumers/depositors in the schemes, floated by the Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies, shall be supervised and monitored by Justice R.Subhash Reddy Former Judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of Sh.Gaurav Aggarwal, the learned Advocate, who is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist justice R.Subhash Reddy as well as Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in disbursing the amount to the genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies.

11.The learned counsel for the complainant, in the said complaint has sought the directions against OPs(Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies) to release the payment of the deposited amount in the schemes, floated by OPs.

12.After going through the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the firm and considered opinion that a holistic and wholesome view must be taken in order to provide practical relief to the complainant and prevent her from being engrossed in multiplicity of litigations, which would go against the very spirit of the Consumer Protection Act, which is a piece of benevolent legislation enacted to provide speedy and easy redressal of consumers grievances at nominal cost.

13.In our considered opinion, keeping in view  the totality of the facts and circumstances of the present complaint as also the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case(supra), it would serve the ends of justice, if the present complaint is disposed of with the directions to the complainant to approach the Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies for determination of her respective claims and thereafter, disbursement of the deposited amount to her by OPs; accordingly, the present complaint is disposed of with the directions to the complainant to submit the claim(s) before the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, along with all requirements, details of her bank accounts, documents of identification, proof of deposits etc. and Ops are directed to facilitate her to get the refund of the deposited amounts, as per the determination of the Registrar, Central Cooperative Societies under the supervision and monitoring of justice R. Subhash Reddy, Former judge of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India with the assistance of Shri Gaurav Aggarwal, learned Advocate appointed as Amicus Curiae in this matter. However,  with a Caveat, that in the event of the complainant’s grievance not being redressed in the above manner, the complainant will be entitled to institute a fresh complaint  on the same cause of action with updated facts and events before the competent Consumer Commission. The said complaint, if any filed, shall be considered and decided as per law. Needless to say, that the time spent in prosecution of the present  complaint and in the prosecution of the claim before the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, will be liable to be excluded for the purpose of counting limitation for filing complaints as prescribed under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to all the parties and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced:21.09.2023

 

 

 

     Dr.Barhm Parkash Yadav           Dr.Sushma Garg           Satpal

                Member                            Member                President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

   Satpal                            

                                          President

 

C.C. No.372 of 2020

 

Present:             Sh. Harish Marhia, Advocate for the complainant.

                        None for the OPs No.1 to 3.

                        Sh. Arjun Kundra, Advocate for OP No.4.        

 

Arguments heard. Vide a separate order of even date, the present complaint is hereby disposed of accordingly.

         A copy of the order be sent to the parties free of costs and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Dt.21.09.2023

 

 

  Dr.Barhm Parkash Yadav                 Dr.Sushma Garg             Satpal

                Member                           Member                President