DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 69 of 1.3.2018

                                      Decided on: 2.2.2021

Raj Kumar aged 41 years, S/o Sh.Babu Lal, R/o House No.40-C, New Lal Bagh, Patiala.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. Sahara India Pariwar.,SCO 10-1111, IInd Floor, Chandigarh, thro0ugh its authorized signatory.
2. Sahara India Pariwar,Sethi Building, IInd Floor, Opposite Polo Ground,  Lower Mall Road, Patiala through its authorized signatory.

                                                                   …………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.A.S.Ramgarh,counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.DhirajPuri, counsel for OPs.                                    

ORDER

          JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT

1. Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant became member of OPs and he deposited Rs.1,00,000/- i.e. Rs.31000/-each against receipts Nos. 034010224579 and 023010224580 and Rs.19000/- each vide receipts No.034010224581 and 034010224582 on 9.7.2015 for a period of one year and the amount was to be returned alongwith interest @15% per annum but the OPs have not paid the matured value of the amount deposited by the complainant. It is averred that the complainant also purchased certificate for Rs.50,000/- on 15.12.2015 which was to be paid on 15.6.2017 with the maturity value of Rs.59,000/- and also certificate for Rs.15000/- on 13.4.2015 to be matured on 12.6.2017. After due date the complainant requested OPs for the payment of the amounts. He also got sent legal notice dated 16.9.2017 upon the OPs but the OPs did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant and caused mental agony and tension to the complainant. There  is thus deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the same by giving directions to the OPs to1,00,000/- alongwith interest and also to pay Rs.50,000/-as compensation for causing mental tension and harassment.
2. Upon notice OPs appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply having raised preliminary objections that there is no relation of complainant and service provider between the complainant and the OPs; that the complaint is not maintainable; that the present complaint is misuse of process of law and is liable to be dismissed.
3. On merits, it is submitted that the complainant contacted the office of society to  become member  and opened account No.25925601253 on 15.12.2015  and deposited Rs.50,000/- and also purchased another bond of the company by opening account No.25925700177 on 13.4.2015 and deposited Rs.15000/- for one year .It is further submitted that the society was making payment  of maturity amount as per terms and conditions of the scheme but the complainant refused to receive the same. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. The OPs denied all the averments and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
4. In support of the complaint, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C8 and closed the evidence.
5. The ld. counsel for the OPs has tendered affidavit, Ex.OPA of Rameshwar Gupta, Manager and closed the evidence.
6. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
7. The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant became member of the OPs and deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the them. The ld. counsel further argued that after date of maturity no amount was refunded by the OPs. So the complaint be allowed.
8. 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.
9. To prove his case complainant Raj Kumar has tendered his affidavit,Ex.CA and he has deposed as per his complaint. He  has also proved the receipts Exs.C1 and C2 of Rs.31,000/-each and receipts Exs.C3 and C4 for Rs.19000/-each. All these documents show that the amount has duly been deposited with the OPs but they have not refunded the amount.Ex.C7 is the legal notice dated 16.9.2017 sent to the OPs.
10. On the other hand Sh.Rameshwar Gupta has tendered affidavit, Ex.OPA and he has deposed as per the written version.
11. As per the case of the complainant, he became member of the OPs and deposited Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipts Exs.C1 to C4. So from the documents, it is clear that total amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been deposited by the complainant but till today nothing has been paid to him by the OPs. No defence has been setup by the OPs to prove that why they have not paid the amount.
12. So due to our discussion the complaint is allowed and the OPs are directed to pay the principal amount of Rs.1,00,000/- alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date the last payment was deposited till realization. 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         

                                                 Member                                    President