DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL FORUM,  PATIALA

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 233 of 27/06/2018

                                                           Decided on:        12/07/2019

Amandeep Singh son of  Sh. Mohinder Singh aged about 36 years, Resident of House No.39, Street No.8-A, Anand Nagar-B, Patiala.

                                                                                          ..Complainant

                                      Versus

1.       Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapurthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024 through its Managing Director.

2.       Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Sahara India Parivar, near Sethi Sales Corporation, Opposite Polo Ground, Patiala (Lower Mall) through its Manager/ Authorized signatory.                                                                                                                         …Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection  Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Sh. M. P. Singh Pahwa, President

                                      Smt. Inderjeet Kaur, Member

                                      Sh. B. S. Dhaliwal, Member   

ARGUED BY

                                      Sh. M. L. Sharma Adv. counsel for the complainant.

                                      Sh. Dhiraj Puri Adv. counsel for the OPs.

 ORDER

                                    M. P. SINGH PAHWA, PRESIDENT

1.                Brief case of the complainant is that he deposited Rs.58000/- vide membership No.25921500985/ account No.25925601469 with OPs at Patiala and in the shape of Fixed deposit under the scheme Code 930157 for 12 months on 31/12/2015 and maturity amount of Rs.63220/- was to be paid by the OPs to  the complainant on maturity date i.e. 31/12/2016.  The OP No.2 issued certificate  No.705000603577 to this effect in the shape of FDR. Total amount deposited was Rs.58000/- and amount payable on maturity was Rs.63220/-. It is alleged that on maturity date and even after that date, complainant visited the office of OPs at Patiala many times for payment of maturity amount i.e. Rs.63220/- but they did not respond to it. Therefore, complainant have suffered from mental harassment and financial loss. The act of OPs clearly amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.  Complainant has prayed for direction to the OPs to make the payment of Rs.63220/- with interest @ 9% from the date of maturity of certificates till realization along with compensation of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Upon notice OPs appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply and raised preliminary objections that complainant is not a consumer. That there is no relation of consumer and service provider. The OP are society duly registered under “Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002” and the complainant is a member of the Society. Thus the relation between the complainant and the OPs is of Member and society.  Therefore, any dispute between the Society and member, consumer complaint is not maintainable before this Forum. If the complainant has any dispute with the society, the complainant is bound to refer his dispute before Arbitrator as per Arbitration Agreement under clause:11 of the scheme Sahara Y. Select & Sahara Minor. Arbitration Clause is also reproduced as under:-

“11. Arbitration:

In case of any dispute between Cooperative Society and Member account: holder the same shall be decided by any arbitration as per “Multi State Co –operative society Act, 2002”. Arbitration proceedings and proceedings arising out of the award shall be binding on both the parties.”

3.                Thereafter the OPs replied parawise. However, it is submitted that  being a member of the society membership No.25921500985 the complainant on 31/12/2015  opted Sahara Y Select Scheme and has chosen to invest Rs.58000/- vide A/c No.25925601469  at sector office Patiala. It is further submitted that complainant did not surrender original certificate or application for demand of FDR. It is also submitted that member is liable to surrender the original certificate along with application for demand of maturity amount. It is denied that complainant approached various times at the office of OP. It is further submitted that complainant failed to fulfill the required formalities and thus due to fault of the complainant payment  could  not be made. Complainant demanded the enhanced rate of interest upon the deposit amount that‘s why the payment could not be made till now.

4.                All the averments of the complainant are denied. In the end, the OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

5.                Parties were afforded opportunity to produce their evidence.

6.                Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of  certificate Ex.C-2, copy of maturity claim form Ex.C-3, Copy of withdrawal slip Ex.C-4, Copy of adhaar Card Ex.C-5 and closed the evidence. OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Rameshwar Gupta, Manager Sahara Ex.OPA  and closed the evidence.

7.                We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.

8.                The complainant has claimed that he has deposited Rs.58000/- with the OPs. The maturity amount on 31/12/2016 was Rs.63220/-. The OP has not denied these facts. The complainant has also claimed that OP has failed to pay the amount. It is  not the case of the OP that amount has been paid. The OP has mainly pleaded  that there is Arbitration clause and the matter is to be referred to Arbitrator.

9.                In the case of M/s EMAAR MGF  LAND Ltd. Vs. Aftab Singh passed in Revision Petition Nos.2629-2630 of 2018 in Civil Appeal NO.s23512-23513 of  2017 decided on 10/10/2018  by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India , it was observed that  there is no bar to file the complaint in Consumer Forum inspite of arbitration clause in agreement between the parties. It is just like a banking system.

10.              Therefore the complaint can not be dismissed on the ground of Arbitration Clause. OP has not produced any agreement. The other objection of the OP is that complainant has not submitted the application for demand of maturity amount. There is also nothing on record that complainant was required to submit any particular  application for release of the amount. The complainant has also placed on record the withdrawal slip. Therefore, in these circumstances the only conclusion is that OP has withheld the amount  without any  justification. Ex.C-3 prove that complainant  was entitled to maturity amount of Rs.63220/- on 31/12/2016. OP has not released this amount, therefore, deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs stands proved.

11.              For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is partly accepted with costs of Rs.5,000/- and OPs are directed to pay Rs.63220/- with further interest @ 9 % per annum as claimed by the complainant. Compliance of this order be made  within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copies of this order. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost under the Rules. Thereafter, file be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.   

ANNOUNCED

DATED: 12/07/2019      

B. S. Dhaliwal      Inderjeet Kaur     M. P. S. Pahwa  

             Member        Member                  President