DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PATIALA
Consumer Complaint No. 503 of 30/12/2019
Decided on: 04/08/2021
Surinder Pal Singh Bawa aged about 60 years, son of S. Bawa Ajit Singh, R/o House No.2636, Urban Estate, Phase-II, Patiala. ....Complainant
Versus
- Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, registered office Sahara
India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow -226024
through its General Manager, Branch Office, Lower Mall, Opp.
Polo Ground, Patiala through its Manager/ Incharge..
- Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited, registered office Society
Limited Under Branch Office, Lower Mall, Opp. Polo Ground, Patiala
Manager through its Manager.
- Sh. Rajesh Kumar Shukla, Manager/ Incharge, Sahara Credit
Cooperative Society Limited, registered office Society Limited Under
the Branch Office Sahara India, Lower Mall, Opp. Polo Ground, Patiala.
….Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 to 14 of the
Consumer Protection Act.
QUORUM
Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President Sh. Y. S. Matta, Member
ARGUED BY:
Sh. B. B. Gupta Adv. counsel for complainant.
Sh. Dhiraj Puri Adv. counsel for the Opposite Parties.
ORDER
JASJIT SINGH BHINDER, PRESIDENT
1. Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Parties namely Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited & Ors. ( hereinafter referred to as the OPs) on the ground that complainant availed the services of the OPs by investing under Sahara Scheme. It is alleged that the complainant deposited Rs.60,000/- in RD account No.25924201864 for 60 months on 17/10/2012 (Being Rs.1000/- per months) In this regard complainant was allotted account no.311013397817, the maturity date of the certificate was 17/10/2017 and maturity amount was Rs.76,671/-. After due date of said certificate/ Account, the complainant submitted all the relevant documents with OPs for releasing of the maturity amount. The complainant ran from pillar to post for the redressal of his grievances but OPs did not release the amount deposited by the complainant with matured value. The complainant requested the OPs so many times to release the maturity amount but they failed to do so. It is alleged that due to non payment of the amount by the opposite parties till date by adding the interest at the agreed rate up to 31/10/2019, a sum of Rs.88,956/- has become payable by the OPs to the complainant and the OPs are liable to pay further interest also on this amount from 1/11/2019 till the date of actual payment in full and final. Besides persons visits to the Ops at Patiala, the complainant got issued legal notice dt. 26/12/2018 through Sh. Brij Bhushan Gupta Adv. Through regd. AD Post to the OPs, but the OPs failed to make the payment till date. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. The complainant has prayed that the opposite parties be directed to release the total amount of Rs.88,956/- of the certificate along with 18% interest from 01.11.2019 till the date of actual payment in full and final and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- on account of compensation for damages caused to the complainant and an amount of Rs.20,000/- on account of litigation expenses.
2. In reply filed by the OPs, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complainant has not approached the Commission with clean hands as the present complaint is wholly misconceived and groundless and unsustainable in law. The complainant is a member of the society and if any member of the society has any grievance then he should go to the arbitrator for arbitration. That in the present complaint the dispute if any between the complainant and the OPs is between members and Society, Therefore, there is special provisions made by the legislatures in Cooperative Societies Act 2008. On merits, it is stated that the complainant being the member of the society had chosen to invest amount in Sahara Plans in the shape of FDR/ certificates at Branch office Patiala of Society. Complainant after understanding the by-laws and objects of the society has become a Member. Before opting the scheme the complainant duly understood the terms and conditions of the scheme and then the complainant had submitted signed application forms to share for the furtherance of the objects of society. It is further submitted that the maturity value of accounts was as per the terms and conditions of scheme. The complainant demanded additional interest after date of maturity but no additional interest is payable to the complainant after the date of maturity. As such there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. The complainant has no right to claim against the terms of the agreement. The present complaint is an abuse of process of law which is completely based on false concocted story and the complainant is not entitled to get any claim or compensation or litigation cost and that the present complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed with cost. It is further pleaded that complainant has made the declaration to abide with the conditions of the scheme, as such the conditions of the scheme are binding upon the complainant and complainant has no right to claim anything against the terms and conditions of the scheme.
3. The learned counsel for the parties produced their respective evidence before this Commission in the shape of documents and affidavits.
4. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties and documents placed on record by the parties as well as heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.
5. To prove the case, ld. Counsel for the complainant has tendered Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant where in complainant has deposed as per his complaint and Ex.C-1 is the copy of legal notice, Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-4 original postal receipts, Ex.C-5 copy of passbook. Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant has invested the amount with the OPs. Further it is contended that the complainant approached the OPs and requested OPs to release the maturity amount of the FDR/ certificate, but the amount was not paid despite approaching the OPs. On the other hand, the OPs have tendered Ex.OPA affidavit of Rajesh Kumar Shukla, Sector Manager along with documents Ex.OP-1 copy of authority letter and Ex.OP-2 copy of terms and conditions.
6. It is important to note that in the complaint, it is alleged by the complainant that he has deposited Rs.60,000/- vide account No.311013397817 but in the document/copy of passbook placed on record as Ex.C-5, only Rs.37,000/- were shown being deposited by the complainant. So, it is proved on record that the complainant deposited Rs,37,000/- with the opposite parties. Even after the maturity of the account, OPs have not paid the maturity amount. Even the Ops have failed to respond to the legal notice Ex.C-1. In this way OPs have defrauded the innocent complainant despite the fact that amount was received but OPs have not made the payment. The maturity date and maturity value of the FDR/certificate is not mentioned on the document/passbook Ex.C-5.
7. In view of our above discussion, we partly allow the complaint and direct the OPs to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.37,000/- for account No.311013397817 along with interest @ 6 % per annum from 17/10/2012. OPs are further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5000/- as compensation for mental agony, harassment and further an amount of Rs.5000/- on account of litigation expenses. This order be complied with by the opposite parties within 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
ANNOUNCED*
Dated: 04/08/2021
(Y. S. Matta) (Jasjit Singh Bhinder)
Member President
