Haryana

Panchkula

CC/100/2022

BALWINDER KAUR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAHARA INDIA PARIVAR . - Opp.Party(s)

S.P GOYAL & G.D GOYAL.

24 Nov 2023

ORDER

 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  PANCHKULA

 

 

Consumer Complaint No	:	100 of 2022
Date of Institution	:	28.03.2022
Date of Decision	:	24.11.2023

 

Balwinder Kaur w/o Bhupinder Singh r/o House No.134, Sidhu Bhawan railway road, Kalka, District Panchkula, aged about 69 years.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ….Complainant

Versus

1.M/s Sahara India Parivar Branch through its Authorised Representative/Manager, office address car centre building Ram    Baug Road Kalka District Panchkula, office upon Axis Bank.

2.M/s Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Limited through         it Managing Directors Mangal Jyoti 101, 227/2 AJC Bose Road,    Kolkata, West Bengal- 700020.

3.M/s Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited through its      Franchisee Head SCO 1110-11, Sector-22B, Chandigarh- 160022.

4.M/s Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited, through its         Authorised Representative/Manager commercial office, Sahara India Bhawan Kapurthala Complex Lucknow.

….Opposite Parties

                                                         

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,  2019

 

Before:      Sh.Satpal, President

Dr.Sushma Garg, Member

Dr.Barhm Parkash Yadav, Member

 

Present:     Ms.Surbhi Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.

                None for OP No.1.

                OPs No.2 to 4 already ex-parte vide order dated                      07.06.2022.

 

 

(Per Satpal, President)  

 

1.The above mentioned complaint is fixed for submission of documentary evidence in the shape of affidavit etc. by the OP No.1, which is not filed today. However, the learned counsel for the complainant, at this stage, has prayed for its disposal as per the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in I.A.No.56308 of 2023 in Writ Petition(C) No.191 of 2022 on 29.03.2023 in case titled as Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India and Ors.

2.Briefly stated, the facts as alleged in the present complaint, are that the executive of Opposite Party(hereinafter referred to as OP) approached the complainant, in the first week of August 2015 asking him, to invest in the fixed deposit under scheme, namely, “MEGA F9 UNIVERSAL JOINT”, belonging to the OPs. The executive of OPs informed the complainant that this plan was flexible where he would be required to make the payment in flexible mode i.e. vide 108 installments. The executive of Ops also informed the complainant that he could also withdraw her invested amount at any time with interest and other numerous benefits. As per the allurement, the complainant had agreed to invest in the said scheme and thereupon, he became a member of the scheme vide membership no.624005001114, account no.24006001135, certificate no. 935000078313; In the said scheme, a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- was deposited w.e.f. 16.12.2015 with the maturity amount is Rs. 3,68,125/- on 16.12.2024. The tenure of the scheme was 108 months i.e. 16.12.2015 to 16.12.2014. It is stated that the complainant was in dire need of money due to her financial loss during Covid-19 pandemic, so he approached the OP No.1, on 16.12.2020 after expiry of 60 months and before the expiry of 108 months with a request to release her deposited amount along with interest and other benefits. It is stated that the complainant also forwarded an application seeking to release the payment of invested amount along with interest and other benefits, on expiry of 60 months, as per scheme’s terms and conditions but the Ops avoided to release the payment to the complainant on one pretext or the other and ultimately refused to pay back the money to him. The complainant had been visiting the office of OPs at Kalka seeking the release of the invested amount but the OPs had paid no heed to her request. The complainant has served a legal notice upon the Ops but to no avail. Due to non payment by the OPs, the complainant has suffered a lot of mental agony and physical harassment and financial loss; hence, the present complaint.

3.Upon notice, Op No.1 appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua complainant is not a consumer of the Ops and there is no relation of consumer and service provider between the complainant and the Ops. It is submitted that Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Ltd. is duly registered under “Multi State Cooperative Society Act, 2002” and the complainant is a member of the society; thus the relation between the complainant and the OPs is of a member and the society. Therefore, for any dispute, between society and member, complaint is not maintainable. There is a valid arbitration agreement between the parties and OPs always work as per the terms of the agreement and byelaws of the society. This Commission has no jurisdiction to try the dispute arising between co-operative society and its members. On merits, it is stated that complainant had herself visited at the office of the OPs and became the member of the society to get benefits of the said scheme. As far as opening of the said scheme is concerned, the same is matter or record. It is submitted that the society was always ready to make the payment as per conditions of the scheme but due to demand of enhanced interest on maturity amount, the payment could not be made to the complainant at that time. It is stated that there is no such clause in the application form that societies are liable to pay the amount of pre-matured FDR’s before the maturity date. Further, the demand raised by the complainant for enhanced rate of interest on the maturity amount was beyond the scheme and scope of the agreement; so there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP No.1 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.  

4.Notices were issued to the OPs No.2 to 4 through registered post, which were not received back either served or unserved despite the expiry of 30 days from the issuance of notices to OPs No.2 to 4; hence, they were deemed to be served and thus, due to non appearance of OPs No.2 to 4, they were proceeded ex-parte by this Commission vide its order dated 07.06.2022.

5.Replication to the written statement of the OP No.1 was filed by the complainant reiterating the contents of the complaint while controverting the contentions of the OP No.1.

6.To prove the case, the learned counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-4 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement.

7.We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the entire record available on the file, minutely and carefully.

8.During the pendency of the present complaint, certain intervening and relevant facts, including the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana and UT State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT Chandigarh, have been brought to our notice, which have a material bearing on the cases in hand.

9.It is pertinent to mention here that some consumer complaints, involving similar question of facts and laws, have been decided by the Commission, in favour of the complainants, directing Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies to release the payment of maturity amount in favour of the depositors/complainants with interest and compensation. However, M/s Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, which is also a group of Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies, in certain other matters, approached the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana, High Court by way of filing the CWP No.5008 of 2022 and CWP No.6813 of 2022 disputing the relationship of a consumer and service provider between the depositors/ complainants on one hand and the Sahariyan Universal Multipurpose Society Limited on the other hand. Keeping in view the interim orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court in said writ petitions, the Hon’ble State Commission UT, Chandigarh in execution application no.EA.116 OF 2021 in complaint case number CC-38 of 2020 titled as Ram Kumar Vs. Sahara India Pariwar Ltd. adjourned the matters Sine die to await the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.5008 of 2022 and other connected writ petitions.

10.The final decision settling the dispute as raised in the aforementioned writ petitions qua the relationship of a consumer and service provider may take a long time, preventing the implementation of the orders passed in consumer complaints against Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies.

11.Now, the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in Sahara connected matters have been brought to the facts of this Commission. Keeping in view the grievances of the depositors of the various schemes, floated by the Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies, an application no.56308 of 2023 was filed by the Union of India Ministry of Corporation in writ petition no.191 of 2022 titled as Pinak Pani Mohanty Vs. Union of India & Ors. in the Hon’ble Apex Court seeking directions to transfer the amount of Rs.5,000/-crores out of utilized amount of Rs.23,937/-crores(lying in “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”) for onward disbursement of the same to the genuine depositors of Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies. The Hon’ble Apex Court disposed of the said application vide its order dated 29.03.2023 by issuing several directions. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the relevant directions issued vide said orders at serial no.1, 2 & 4, are reproduced as under:-

1. Out of  the total amount of Rs.24,979.67 crores lying in the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”, Rs.5000crores be transferred to the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, who in turn, shall disburse  the same against  the legitimate dues of the depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies, which shall be paid to the genuine depositors in the most transparent manner and on proper identification and on submitting proof of their deposits  and proof of their claims and to be deposited in their respective bank account directly.
2. The disbursement shall be supervised and monitored by Justice R.Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of this Court with the able assistance of Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned Advocate, who is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist Justice R.Subhash Reddy as well as the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in disbursing the amount to the genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies. The manner and modalities for making the payment is to be worked out by the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in consultation with Justice R.Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of this Court and Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned Advocate.
3. –
4. We direct that the amount be paid to the respective genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies out of the aforesaid amount of Rs.5000crores at the earliest, but not later than nine months from today. The balance amount thereafter be again transferred to the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”.

12.The Hon’ble Apex Court, in the larger interest of depositors, has issued the above mentioned directions so as to bring uniformity in the redressal mechanism as also to enable the depositors to seek the refund of their deposited amount as early as possible. Pertinently, as per directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide its said order dated 29.03.2021, the manner and modalities for making disbursement of the deposited amount to the consumers is to be worked out by Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies under the guidelines of R.Subhash Reddy Former Judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Sh.Gaurav Aggarwal, Advocate. Moreover, the disbursement of the deposited amount, by various consumers/ depositors in the scheme floated by the Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies, shall be supervised and monitored by Justice R.Subhash Reddy Former Judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of Sh.Gaurav Aggarwal, the learned Advocate, who is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist justice R.Subhash Reddy as well as Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in disbursing the amount to the genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Co-operative Societies.

13.The complainant, in the present complaint has sought the directions against OPs(Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies) to release the payment of her deposited amount in the schemes, floated by OPs.

14.After going through the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the firm and considered opinion that a holistic and wholesome view must be taken in order to provide practical relief to the complainant and prevent him from being engrossed in multiplicity of litigations, which would go against the very spirit of the Consumer Protection Act, which is a piece of benevolent legislation enacted to provide speedy and easy redressal of consumers grievances at nominal cost.

15.In our considered opinion, keeping in view  the totality of the facts and circumstances of the present complaint as also the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case(supra), it would serve the ends of justice, if the present complaint is disposed of with the directions to the complainant to approach the Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies for determination of his/her respective claims and thereafter, disbursement of the deposited amount to his/her by OPs; accordingly, the present complaint is disposed of with the directions to the complainant to submit  his/her claim(s) before the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, alongwith all requirements, details of his/her bank accounts, documents of identification, proof of deposits etc. and Ops are directed to facilitate his/her to get the refund of his/her deposited amounts, as per the determination of the Registrar, Central Cooperative Societies under the supervision and monitoring of justice R.Subhash Reddy, Former judge of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India with the assistance of Shri Gaurav Aggarwal, learned Advocate appointed as Amicus Curiae in this matter. However, with a Caveat, that in the event of the complainant’s grievance not being redressed in the above manner,  the complainant will be entitled to institute a fresh complaint  on the same cause of action with updated facts and events before the competent Consumer Commission. The said complaint, if any filed, shall be considered and decided as per law. Needless to say, that the time spent in prosecution of the present complaint and in the prosecution of the claim before the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, will be liable to be excluded for the purpose of counting limitation for filing complaints as prescribed under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to all the parties and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced:24.11.2023

 

 

 

Dr.Barhm Parkash Yadav      Dr.Sushma Garg            Satpal

                Member                            Member               President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

         Satpal                              

        President

 

 

         C.C.No. 100 of 2022

Present:     Ms.Surbhi Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.

                None for OP No.1.

                OPs No.2 to 4 already ex-parte vide order dated                      07.06.2022.

 

                Arguments heard on behalf of the complainant. Vide a separate order of even date, the present complaint is hereby disposed of accordingly.

A copy of the order be sent to the parties free of costs and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Dt.24.11.2023    

 

 

Dr.Barhm Parkash Yadav       Dr.Sushma Garg            Satpal

        Member                           Member                 President