Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/20/106

Sandeep Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Anshu Gupta Adv.

14 Jan 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No: 106 dated 16.07.2020.                                                       

                                                Date of decision: 14.01.2021. 

 

Sandeep Kumar aged about 36 years son of Sh. Hans Raj, resident of House No.2374/31-A, Anand Vihar Colony, Chander Nagar, Ludhiana.                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ..…Complainant

                                                Versus

1. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-266024 through its authorized signatory.
2. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, B-1/367, Guru Nanak PUra, Kailash Chowk, Civil Lines, Ludhiana through its Manager.
3. Harish Chander Patel (Code 242913398) 360, Heera Nagar, Kakowal Road, Street No.2, Ludhiana.                                                                                                                                          …..Opposite parties 

Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.

QUORUM:

SH. K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

MS. JYOTSNA THATAI, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         Sh. Harvinder Pal Singh, Advocate.  

For OPs                         :         Exparte.

 

ORDER

PER K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

1.                This complaint under Section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein-after in short to be referred as ‘Act’) has been filed by the above named complainant on the allegations that the OP3, an authorized agent of OP1 and OP2 induced the complainant to deposit Rs.100/- per day with OP1 and he would be paid a sum of Rs.36,500/- along with interest (a period of one year). Accordingly, the complainant agreed to deposit Rs.100/- per day and OP3 started collecting Rs.100/- per day in cash from the complainant on behalf of OP1 and OP2. After a period of one year, the complainant approached OP2 and OP3 and demanded the amount of Rs.36,500/- with interest. However, instead of making the payment, OPs started dillydallying. On persistent request of the complainant, OP2 made a part payment of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant on 10.12.2018 and insisted that the remaining amount of Rs.22,266/- be invested in a fixed deposit. As the complainant was in dire need of money at that time, on the insistence of the OPs, the complainant agreed to get the amount of Rs.22,266/- converted into a FDR. Accordingly, the certificate/FDR of  18 months bearing No.787003711075 for Rs.22,266/- dated 01.12.2018 having maturity value of Rs.26,073/- was issued to the complainant and the maturity date of the same was 01.06.2020. After the maturity date of FDR, the complainant again approached OP2 for encashment of FDR, but the OP2 refused to encash the same and instead pressurized him to further renew the FDR for 42 months. The complainant issued a legal notice dated 08.06.2020 through registered post calling upon the OPs to pay the maturity amount of Rs.26,073/- with interest, but despite that the OPs did not make the payment. Hence the complaint whereby it has been requested that the OPs be directed to pay Rs.26,073/- along with interest as well as to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for having caused harassment and mental tension to the complainant.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, but they did not appear despite wait and were proceeded against exparte.

3.                In exparte evidence, the complainant submitted his affidavit Ex. CA along with documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C7 and closed the evidence.

4.                We have heard the counsel for the complainant and have gone through the written arguments submitted by him.

5.                It is evidence from the oral and documentary evidence available n the record that the OP1 and OP2 issued a FDR Ex.C3 in favour of the complainant for Rs.22,266/-. As per the case of the complainant, the FDR had a maturity value of Rs.26,073/- which became due on expiry of 18 months on 01.06.2020. This amount has not been paid by the OPs despite request made by the complainant. This amounts to deficiency of service on the part of OP1 and OP2. Moreover, the OPs do not seem to have any valid reason for not paying the maturity amount of Rs.26,073/-.

6.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint is allowed with an order that OP1 and OP2 shall pay a sum of Rs.26,073/- to the complainant along with interest @8% per annum from 01.06.2020 till the date of actual payment. OPs shall further pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) to complainant on account of compensation for mental pain and agony and another sum of Rs.3,000/-(Rupees Three Thousand only) on account of litigation expenses. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.        

 

                    (Jyotsna Thatai)                             (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated;14.01.2021.

Gobind Ram.