DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 333 of 14.8.2018

                                      Decided on: 2.2.2021

1. Usha Silyan wife of Late Sushil Kumar Silyan, resident of H.No.29, Street No.3, Opposite MohindraCollage,Mohindra College Colony, Patiala.
2. Bharat Silyan son of Sushil Kumar Silyan, resident of H.No.29, Street No.3, Opposite Mohindra Collage,Mohindra College Colony, Patiala.
3. Anamika Silyan daughter of Sushil Kumar Silyan, resident of H.No.29, Street No.3, Opposite MohindraCollage,Mohindra College Colony, Patiala.

                                                                   …………...Complainants

                                      Versus

1. Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Head office, Sahara India Bhawan,1-Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024 (U.P.) through its Managing Director/Chairman.
2. Sahara India Parivar, Opposite Polo Ground,NearSethi Sales Corporation, Lower Mall, Patiala through its Manager/Sector Manager.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

                                      Sh.Y.S.Matta, Member 

ARGUED BY

                                      Sh.AmitTrehan,counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.DhirajPuri, counsel for OPs.

ORDER

          JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT

1. Briefly the case of the complainants is that Late Sushil Kumar had opened an account with the OPs on the basis of monthly deposit of Rs.6000/- for a period of 60 months commencing from 18.12.2012. After the due date, complainant approached and requested the OPs for the payment of the amount but the OPs refused to refund the amount. The complainant also got served a legal notice dated 8.4.2018 upon the OPs but of no avail. There is thus deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the complaint by giving directions to the OPs to refund the principal amount so deposited by the complainant alongwith interest and also to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.5500/-as costs of the complaint.
2. Upon notice OPs appeared and contested the complaint by filing written reply having raised preliminary objections that there is no relationship of consumer and service provider between the complainant and OPs, so the complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.On merits, the OPs denied all averments and have prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
3. In support of the complaint, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered Ex.CA of the complainant alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C19 and closed the evidence.
4. The ld. counsel for the OPs tendered in evidence Ex.OPA affidavit of RameshYadav ,Sector Manager and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
6. The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that Late Sushil Kumar Silyan had opened the account with the OPs on the basis of monthly deposit of Rs.6000/- commencing from 18.12.2012 and the complainant deposited the amount for 15 months. Now the amount has become due but the OPs refused to refund the same. So the complaint be allowed.
7. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs has argued that this court has no jurisdiction to try the complaint and the complainant has to file the same before  Assistant Registrar of the Cooperative Society, so the complaint be dismissed.
8. To prove this complaint, complainant has tendered his affidavit,Ex.CA and he has deposed as per his complaint. Ex.C1 is the copy of Aadhar card, Ex.C2 is the copy of pass book.Exs.C5 to Ex.C18 are the receipts showing the deposit of Rs.6000/-each.Ex.C19 is the legal notice sent to the OPs.
9. On the other hand Sh.Ramesh Yadav, Sector Manager of Sahara India Pariwar  has tendered his affidavit, Ex.OPA and he has deposed as per the written version.
10. As per the case of the complainant , he opened the account with the OPs and he had paid the amount vide receipts Exs.C3 to C17.As per the documents the account was opened for Rs.6000/- per month and the complainant deposited the amount for 15 months.ExC2 is the copy of pass book showing the deposit of Rs.90,000/-.
11. From the documents, it is clear that total amount of Rs.90,000/- was deposited by late Sushil Kumar Silyan but till today nothing has been paid by the OPs. No defence has been setup by the OPs to prove that whey they have not paid the amount.
12. So due to our above discussion, the complaint stands allowed and the OPs are directed to refund Rs.90,000/-alongwith interest @9% per annum from the last date of deposit to the legal heirs of late Sushil Kumar Silyan, in equal shares. The OPs  are also directed to pay Rs.5000/-as compensation and Rs.5000/-as costs of litigation. Compliance of the order be made by the  OPs within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:2.2.2021                                     

                                                Y.S.Matta            Jasjit Singh Bhinder

                                                 Member                       President