Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/241/2020

Shreta D/o Shiv Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sahara credit cooperative Society Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Rajesh Kumar

08 Jun 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KURUKSHETRA.

 

                                                                    Complaint No.:    241 of 2020.

                                                                   Date of institution:         28.07.2020.

                                                                   Date of decision: 08.06.2022

 

Shreta d/o late Shri Shiv Kumar, r/o H.No.816/12, Darra Khera, Thanesar, District Kurukshetra/

                                                                                                …Complainant.

                                                     Versus

 

1. The Superintendent, Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Regd. Office Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-22502.
2. Sahara India Pariwar, Amin Road, near Gita Girls School, Kurukshetra, through its concerned officer.

...Respondents.

 

CORAM:   NEELAM KASHYAP, PRESIDENT.    

                   NEELAM, MEMBER.

                   ISSAM SINGH SAGWAL, MEMBER.           

 

Present:       Shri Rajesh Kaushik, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Shri Shishan Dutt Kaushik, Advocate for the Opposite Parties.

 

ORDER:

 

1.                This is a complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (previously Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986).

2.                It is alleged in the complaint that on 11.02.2016, complainant had made SAHARA.S.NOKHA Rd bearing account No.24796200171 with OP No.2 and deposited a sum of Rs.3000/- on monthly basis for the period of 36 months. At the time of opening the account with OP No.2, it assured that upon completion of 36 months, a sum of Rs.1,22,000/- will be paid to her. A passbook had also been issued/released in her name. She had deposited a total sum of Rs.39,000/- till 15.09.2017 and in this regard entries were made in the passbook. After completion of above said time i.e. 11.02.2019, the complainant visited the office of OP No.2 and requested it to release the entire amount as per assurance given by it, but OPs lingered on the matter on one pretext or other and lastly refused to pay the same. After that, complainant made various requests to the OPs to make payment of RD amount, but they failed to pay the same, due to which, she exposed great mental agony, hardship and financial loss, which amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the OPs.

3.                Upon notice of complaint, OPs appeared and filed their written statements denying the relationship of consumer and service provider between the parties. The OPs have denied the contents regarding depositing of amount in the form of Rd for want of knowledge. It is submitted that the OPs are Society duly registered under Multi State Cooperative Society Act, 2002 and complainant is a member of said Society, therefore, relationship between the complainant and OPs is of Member and Society and if any dispute between the Society and Member arose, consumer complaint is not maintainable before this Commission. The OPs had not entered into any agreement with the complainant or received any contribution from the complainant to provide any service. If complainant who is Member of Society, had any grievance or dispute with the Society, the complainant is bound to refer his dispute before Arbitrator as per Clause 11 of the terms & conditions of scheme Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd. and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

4.                The complainant, in support of her case, tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A along with documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 and closed her evidence.

5.                On the other hand, the OPs tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A and closed their evidence.

6.                We have heard the learned counsel of the parties and carefully gone through the case file.

7.                Learned counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant had made SAHARA.S.NOKHA Rd bearing account No.24796200171 with OP No.2 and deposited a sum of Rs.3000/- on monthly basis for the period of 36 months. At the time of opening the account with OP No.2, it assured that upon completion of 36 months, a sum of Rs.1,22,000/- will be paid to the complainant. A passbook had also been issued/released in her name. The complainant deposited a total sum of Rs.39,000/- till 15.09.2017 and in this regard entries were made in the passbook. After completion of above said time i.e. 11.02.2019, the complainant visited the office of OP No.2 and requested it to release the entire amount as per assurance given by it, but OPs failed to pay the same, which amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the OPs.

8.                Learned counsel for the OPs has argued that there is no relationship of consumer and service provider between the parties and denied the contents regarding depositing of amount in the form of Rd for want of knowledge. It is further argued that the OPs are Society duly registered under Multi State Cooperative Society Act, 2002 and complainant is a member of said Society, therefore, relationship between the complainant and OPs is of Member and Society and if any dispute between the Society and Member arose, consumer complaint is not maintainable before this Commission. If complainant, who is Member of Society, had any grievance or dispute with the Society, the complainant is bound to refer his dispute before Arbitrator and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

9.                At the outset, learned counsel for the OPs raised objection that the complainant is not a consumer, as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, but this contention of OPs is devoid of any force, because, perusal of case file shows that the complainant deposited the part payment of RD amount with the OPs, as such, she availed the services of the OPs and became the consumer of OPs, as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

10.              Learned counsel for the OPs further raised objections that if the complainant, who is Member of Society, had any grievance or dispute with the Society, then the complainant was bound to refer her dispute before Arbitrator, as per Clause 11 of the terms & conditions of scheme Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., as such, this Commission has no jurisdiction to decide the present complaint. But this contention of OPs is also without any force, because, as per settled law, remedy under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, is an additional remedy and can be availed by the complainant, if she does not wish to avail the relief under the Arbitration Act, therefore, the present complaint, before this Commission, is maintainable and this Commission has every jurisdiction to entertain and decide the same.

11.              Now coming to the merits of the case.

12.              There is no dispute that the complainant opened a RD account with OP No.2 bearing account No.24796200171 and Membership No.24791600094 on deposition of 36 monthly installments of Rs.3,000/- each, from 11.02.2016 to 11.02.2019 i.e. for three years, vide document Ex.C-3.

13.              The grievance of the complainant is that she deposited total Rs.39,000/- with the OPs till 15.9.2017, but after maturity period of said RD account, when she requested the OPs to release the said amount with interest, they refused to pay the same. To support her contention, complainant produced Member Ledger Statement Ex.C-4 of OPs and from perusal of this Ledger Statement, it is clear that till 15.09.2017, complainant deposited total RD amount of Rs.39,000/- with the OPs.

14.              Now-a-days finance companies attracts the innocent people to deposit/invest their blood sweat earnings with them with the lure of higher interest rate, and when the time comes to return the said deposit/investment with interest to those people, then these finance companies refused to pay the same or run away by closing their office/business overnight, by taking the entire life's earning/deposited capital of those innocent people. In the case in hand, the OPs also allured the complainant to deposit/invest her money with them on monthly basis in the shape of RD, by saying that after maturity/completion of said RD, she will receive the handsome maturity amount and as such, by falling into their trap, the complainant deposited total Rs.39,000/- till 15.09.2017, with the OPs, but after maturity period of said RD i.e. on 11.02.2019, when the complainant demanded the deposited amount with interest from the OPs, they refused to release the same, rather, they kept the said amount with them even after the maturity date and using the same. Due to non-releasing the deposited amount with interest of RD to the complainant, by the OPs, she suffered mental agony, physical harassment as well as financial loss, without any fault on her part, which is an act gross deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practise, on the part of the OPs. For their above act of gross deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practise, the OPs, not only liable to release the total deposited amount of RD with interest as per scheme, to the complainant, but also liable to pay the compensation amount and litigations expenses to the complainant.

15.              In view of our above discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the OPs to release the deposited RD amount with interest as per scheme of account bearing No.24796200171 (as shown in Member Ledger Statement Ex.C-4) to the complainant. The complainant shall also be entitled to sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for the mental harassment and agony caused to her along with Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses. The OPs are further directed to make the compliance of this order within a period of 45 days from the date of preparation of certified copy of this order, failing which, the Award amount (except compensation amount and litigations expenses) shall carry interest @6% simple per annum, from the date of this order, till its actual realization and the complainant shall be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 71/72 of the Act, against the OPs. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost, as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record-room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Commission:

Dated:08.06.2022.

    

                                                                                        (Neelam Kashyap)               

(Neelam)                    (Issam Singh Sagwal)                   President,

Member.                    (Member).                                     DCDRC, Kurukshetra.           
 

 

 

Typed by: Sham Kalra, Stenographer.