Orissa

Cuttak

CC/118/2022

Mukunda Behera - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

M K Pati & associates

17 Dec 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.118/2022

 

Mukunda Behera,

S/o:LateKusei Behera,

Resident of Kusumdevi Women’s College,

Darkhapatna,At/PO:Kalyaninagar,

P.S:Madhupatna,Cuttack,

Town/Dist:Cuttack-753012.                                       ... Complainant.

 

                                                                Vrs.

1.        The Sector Manager/Asst. Manager worker,

        Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

       And Saharayan Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd.,

       (Sahara India),Choudhury Bazar Sector 1352,

P.O:Buxibazar,P.S:Cantonment Road,

Dist:Cuttack,Pin-753001.

 

2.     The Regional Manager,Worker.                             

        Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

        And Saharayan Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd.,

        (Sahara India) Territorial Office,Plot No.50,

Sahidnagar,P.O/P.S:Sahidnagar,

Bhubaneswar,Dist:Khurda,Pin-751007.

 

3.     The Zonal Manager Worker,

                                          Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

          And Saharayan Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd.,

          (Sahara India),Plot No.50,

Sahidnagar,P.O/P.S:Sahidnagar,

Bhubaneswar,Dist:Khurda,Pin-751007.

 

4.       The Authorized Person,

           Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

           (Sahara India) Regd. Office,Sahara India Bhawan,

           1 KapoorthalaComplex,Aliganj,

            Lucknow,226420,Uttar Pradesh.

 

5.        The Authorized Person,

Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,

           (Shara India) Regd. Office: Mangal Jyoti,

           101,227/2 AJC Bose Road,Kolkata,

           West Bengal-700020.                                                     

 

6.        The Authorized Person,

Multi Purpose Society Ltd.(Sahara India),

Regd.Office195,Zone-1, In front of D.B.Mall,

               M.P.Nagar,Bhopal,Madhypapradesh-462011.

                                 7.     Managing Worker and Chairman of Sahara India Paribar,

            Sahara IndiaBhawan,1 Kapoorthala Complex,

Aliganj,Lucknow-226024,Uttar Pradesh.                                                              ... Opp. Parties.

 

 

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                                Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

               Date of filing:     10.06.2022

Date of Order:    17.12.2022

 

For the complainant:            Mr. M.K.Pati,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps.                 :          None.

 

Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.                                                      

          The case of the complainant in short is that he had invested money by purchasing five number of Fixed Deposit Certificates from the O.Ps in one of the scheme of the O.Ps namely “Sahara Worker SC”.  The maturity period was 36 months for all the Fixed Deposit Certificates.  On maturity, he was entitled to receive an amount of Rs.1,718/- on 31.08.2022, Rs.5296/- on 31.08.2022, Rs.3,852/- on 31.08.2022, Rs.6,644/- on 23.8.2021 and Rs.10,431/- on 21.8.2021 respectively towards the maturity amount of aforesaid Five Fixed Deposit Certificates.  In total, he was entitled to get Rs.27,941/- as maturity value by the date of maturity.  After the maturity date, the complainant in order to get his matured amount from the O.Ps had visited the office  of the O.Ps on many occasions  but the O.Ps by taking different pleas did not release his maturity amount.  Hence, the complainant has filed the present case with a prayer for a direction to the O.Ps to pay his maturity amount in total for all certificates calculated as  Rs.27,941/-,alongwith future interest @ 18% per annum as well as compensation of Rs.15,000/- towards mental agony and harassment as well as a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards his litigation expenses.

          The complainant has filed some documents in order to prove his case.

2.       Though the O.Ps have appeared but did not file their written versions.  Hence, they are set exparte.

3.         The points for determination in this case are as follows:

            i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable ?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps  and if they had practised any unfair trade?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed?

Point No.ii.

Out of the three points, point no.ii being the most pertinent one is taken up first for consideration here in this case.

The averments as made by the complainant in his complaint petition gains ample corroboration from the documentary evidence filed by him.

Admittedly, the complainant had purchased five number of Fixed Deposit Certificates namely “Sahara Worker SC” from the O.Ps on payment of Rs.1,291/-, Rs.3,979/-, Rs.2,894/-,Rs.4,992/- and Rs.7,837/- on 29.11.19,29.11.19,29.11.2019,23.8.2018,21.8.2018 respectively.  The maturity amount for the said certificates/account were of Rs.1,718/-, Rs.5296/-, Rs.3,852/-, Rs.6,644/- and Rs.10,431/- respectively for those certificates and the maturity date were by 31.8.2022,31.8.2022,31.8.2022, 23.8.2021 and 21.8.2021 respectively. The contention of the complainant is supported with Xerox copies of Fixed Deposit certificates filed by him. The O.Ps have not filed their written version but participated in the hearing of this case.  It is pleaded by the learned counsel for the O.Ps that the complainant is not a consumer under the C.P.Act,2019.  It is also pleaded  by him that the O.Ps are Cooperative Societies constituted under Multi State Co-operative Society Act,2002 and any dispute between the complainant and the O.Ps is required to be adjudicated under the said Act as the complainant is a member of the O.Ps, Society but not under the C.P.Act,2019.  It is urged by him that as in the said Act, there is Arbitration clause for adjudication of the dispute between the parties, the present case before this Commission is not maintainable.  In support of his contention he relied upon decisions of the Hon’ble National Commission decided on 2.9.2013 in R.P.No.4871 of 2012 in the case of M/s. Anjana Abraham Chembethil Vs. The Managing Director, The Koothattukulam Farmers Services Co-operative Bank and other decisions.  In contra, the learned counsel for the complainant relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 2004(SC) 448,in the case of  the Secretary,Thirumurugan Cooperative Agricultural Credit Society Vrs. M.Lalitha (dead) through LRs and others, wherein The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that even if there is arbitration clause in the Cooperative Societies Act, Consumer Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint case as there is no provision in the said Co-operative Society Act ousting the jurisdiction of Consumer Commission.  He also relied upon another decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 2021SC,70 in the case of Imperia Structures Ltd. Vrs. Anil Patni and others, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that RERA Act does not debar for adjudication of dispute by the Consumer Commission for redressal of grievances of the complainant. The complainant also relied upon another decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in another decision reported in (2022)6 SCC,496 in the case of Voda Phone, Idea Cellular Ltd. Vrs. Ajay Kumar Agarwal, wherein it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that even if there is provision U/S-7B of the Indian Telegraph Act,1885, the aggrieved person can approach the Consumer Commission as the jurisdiction of the Consumer Commission is not ousted U/S-7B of the Indian Telegraph Act.  The decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is the Law of land and would prevail upon decisions of Hon’ble National Commission as well as other decisions as relied upon by the O.Ps.

At this juncture, it is relevant to go through the Sec-100 of  the C.P.Act,2019.  In Sec-100 of the C.P.Act,2019 in clear and unambiguous terms it is stated that the provisions of the Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other Law for the time being in force.    In the present case, the O.Ps could not point out the provisions of Multi State Cooperative Societies Act,2002,where the jurisdiction of Consumer Commission is ousted.

In view of the Sec-100 of the C.P.Act,2019 as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is held that even if there is arbitration clause in the Multi State Cooperative Societies Act,2002, this Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the case of the complainant.

 It is not disputed that the complainant had purchased five number of Fixed Deposit Certificates from the O.Ps on payment of Rs,.20,993/- in total.  The maturity date of the said certificates/bonds are clearly mentioned in the said certificate.  After 36 months, of purchasing the certificates, the complainant was entitled to get the maturity amount.    The maturity date of first three certificates having A/c. No.13527804286,13527804283 and 13527804285 is 31.8.2022.  But the complainant before the maturity date i.e. on 16.6.2022 has approached this Commission.  Hence, the dispute in respect of the maturity amount of the said certificates being premature in nature is notmaintainable. TheO.Ps had not given the complainant the matured amount after the maturity period in respect of rest two certificates having A/c. No.13527204420 and 13527204398.  He had approached many times to get his maturity amount but the O.Ps did not give the matured amount of his certificates,which amounts to deficiency of service by the O.Ps.  In this context, learned counsel for the complainant has relied upon a decision of Hon’ble National Commission reported in 2001(3) CPR, 194(NC) in the case of Smt. Kalawati& others vrs. M/s. United Vaish Co-operative Thirft& Credit Society Ltd., wherein the Hon’ble National Commission has held that non-refund of fixed deposit after maturity comes under the deficiency in service.  This decision is applicable in the present case.  Hence, the O.Ps have committed deficiency in service as well as has adopted unfair trade practice by not releasing the complainant’s matured amount after its maturity period.  This issue is answered in favour of the complainant. 

Pointsno.i& iii.

From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is definitely maintainable and the complainant is entitled to the maturity amount in respect of two certificates only having A/cNo.13527204420 and 13527204398 as claimed by him.  Hence, it is so ordered;

                                    ORDER

The case is allowed exparte against the O.Ps.  The O.Ps are found to be jointly and severally liable here in this case.  Thus, the O.Ps are directed to pay the total matured amount of Rs.17,075/- towards the two number of Fixed Deposit Certificates  having A/c.No.13527204420 and 13527204398  to the complainant alongwith interest thereon @ 12% per annum from the date of maturity against the two nos. of Fixed Deposit Certificates till the final payment is made.  The O.Ps are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards the compensation for mental agony and harassment as well as a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the litigation expensesto the complainant.  This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 17^th day of December,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.                                                                                                                                                                     

                                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                        Member.

 

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President.