DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 84 of 17.3.2021

                                      Decided on: 29.1.2024

Sohan Singh, aged about 50 years S/o Sh.Harbans Singh R/o Village Turi, P.O.Majhi, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur.

                                                                    …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. Sahara India Parivar, Franchise Office, Near Tehsil Complex, Samana, District Patiala through  its Agent Rakesh Bansal R/o Dirba District Sangrur.

2. Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited, Sahara India Bhawan-1, Kapurthala Complex, Aligni, Lucknow 226024, Branch Office: First Floor, Oriental Bank, now mereged into Punjab National Bank, Backside Tehsil Road, Samana, District Patiala.

3. Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Registered Office: Mangal Jyoti 101227/2AJC Bose Road, Kolkata, West Bengal-700020,Regd.No.MSCS/Cr/594/2012 Office Sethi Complex,  Opposite Polo Ground, Modi College Chowk, Lower Mall, Patiala, Punjab-147001.

…………Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM

                                      Ms Gagandeep Gosal, President

                                      Sh.G.S.Nagi,Member

ARGUED BY

                                      Sh.N.S.Saifdipur, counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.Dhiraj Puri, counsel for OPs.

 ORDER

                                      GAGANDEEP GOSAL,PRESIDENT

1. The instant complaint is filed by Sohan                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Singh (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited and another (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act ( for short the Act).
2. The case of the complainant is that he is a consumer as defined under the Act 2019 as he has availed the services of the OPs by depositing an amount with them.
3. The facts of the complaint are that complainant deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the OPs. OPs issued five certificates of Rs.17000/-each and one certificate of Rs.15000/- i.e. for the total amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on 12.4.2010 for six years. Its maturity date was 12.4.2020 and amount of maturity was Rs.3,13,842/-. Thereafter OPs called the complainant and asked him to covert the amount in Sahara Q Shop Unique Product i.e. with OP No.2. Complainant agreed for the same. OPs issued five certificates of Rs.22,700/- each and one certificate of Rs.20,050/- i.e. for the total amount of Rs.1,33,550/-.Maturity date of the same was 2018.Complainant was again called by the OPs in the year 2018 i.e. on 7.8.2018 and apprised him to convert the amount into the scheme Golden 24 i.e. with OP No.3 for which the complainant agreed. OPs issued six new certificates i.e. five of Rs.22,700/- each and one of Rs.20,050/- for the total amount of Rs.1,44,550/-.The maturity date of the said certificates was 7.8.2020 and the maturity value was Rs.1,67,526/-.
4. After date of maturity, complainant went to the office of OPs for the maturity amount but the OPs put off the matter on one pretext or the other and have thus failed to repay the maturity amount till date. There is thus not only deficiency in service but OPs have also indulged in unfair trade practice due to which complainant suffered mentally and physically. Hence this complaint with the prayer for giving a direction to the OPs to pay the maturity amount of Rs.1,67,526/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum alongwith Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses etc.
5. Upon notice, OPs appeared through their counsel and filed written statement having raised preliminary objections that the complainant has not approached this Commission with clean hands as the present complaint is wholly misconceived and groundless and unsustainable in law, is liable to be dismissed.
6. It is averred by the OPs that through present complaint the complainant is claiming having deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-during the period of 6 years and maturity date is 12.4.2020. It is alleged that OP No.3 i.e. Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Limited  is duly registered Society and the complainant is member of Society. Thus relationship between the complainant and OPs is of Member and Society. Therefore, for any dispute between Society and Member, this Hon’ble Commission has no territorial jurisdiction. Hence the present complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed with cost.
7. It is further averred that the complainant had contacted the Patiala office where he is made his interest to become member and after understanding the bye-laws and objects of the Society, he had obtained membership of the Society. As such being a member of society he got right to take part in the schemes of Society.
8. That for Society, the identity and status of the complainant is that of a member of the society. He simply shared his money for furtherance of the objects of society. It is alleged that any person who is not a member has no right to take part in the schemes of society. The complainant being a member is himself a part of society; as such he cannot separate himself from society. The OPs have also placed reliance upon citation Ms.Anjana Abraham Chembehil Vs. The Managing Director,The Koothattukulam Farmers Service Cooperative Bank Ltd.,NCDRC 759 (2013) 4 CPJ 33(NC) having alleged that  the Hon’ble National Commission has held that the Consumer Commission has no jurisdiction to try the dispute arising between Co-operative Societies and its members and have placed reliance upon Section 69 of the Cooperative Societies Act,1969 in case of settlements of disputes, which runs as follows:

69:-Disputes tobe decided by Cooperative Arbitration Court and Registrar:-1. Not with standing anything contained in any law for the First time being in force.It disputes arises:-

1. Among Members; past members or person claiming through members, past members and deceased members.
2. Between a member, past member or deceased member and the society, its committee or any officer, agent or employee of that society or
3. Between the society or its committee and any past committee, any officer, agent or employee or any past officer, past agent or past employee or the nominee, heirs or legal representatives of any deceased officer, deceased agent or deceased employee of the society.
4. Between the society and any other society: or
5. Between the society and the members of a society affiliated to it: or
6. Between the society and a person, other than a member of the society, who has been granted a loan by the society or with whom the society has or had business transaction or any person claiming through such a person; Or
7. Between the society and a surety of a member, past member, deceased member or employee or a person, other than a member, who has been granted a loan by the society, whether such surety is or is not a member of the society Or;

Between the society and surety and a creditor of the society; such disputes shall be referred to the Cooperative Arbitration Court constituted under Section 70A, in case non monetary disputes and to the Registrar, as the case may be, shall decide such disputes and no other authority, shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or other proceedings in respect of such disputes

and relied upon the judgments titled as Charanjeet Singh Vs. Sahara Credit
Co-operative Society Limited and another District Commission, Ambala CC No.0368 of 2018 decided on 5.2.2019,Vinod Kumar  Vs. Sahara Credit
Co-operative Society Limited and Ors., District Commission-Bhiwani C.C.No.50 of 2018, decided on 23.7.2019, Satish Kumar Vs. Sahara Credit
Co-operative Society Limited and Ors., District Commission, Bhiwani, C.C.No.51 of 2019, decided on 23.7.2019.

9. It is further averred that in the present complaint the dispute, if any, between the complainant and the OPs is between Member and Society, therefore, there is special provisions made by the legislatures in Cooperative Societies Act,2008. Part XIII Disputes, 187. Settlement Disputes reads as under:
1.  
1.  
2.  
3.  
4.  
10.  As such the present complaint is not maintainable before this Hon’ble Commission and is liable to be dismissed.
11. On merits, the Ops reiterated the facts raised in the preliminary objections which are not need to be repeated for the sake of brevity. The OPs have averred that complainant has concocted a story and has filed present complaint claiming payment which is against the terms and conditions of agreement. The complainant has no right to claim against terms of agreement. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs which caused mental harassment and torture to the complainant. All other averments made in the complaint have been denied by the OPs and prayer has been made for dismissal of complaint with cost.
12. In order to prove the case, ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C6 copies of certificates, Ex.C7 to C12, copies of certificates issued by the OPs, Exs.C13 to C18, copies of certificates and closed  the evidence.
13. The ld. counsel for the OPs has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA affidavit of Ramesh Kumar Yadav, Sector Manager of OPs and closed the evidence.
14. Written arguments have been filed by the ld. counsel for the OPs. We have gone through the same, heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully with the able assistance of the Ld. counsels.
15. It is proved on the file that the complainant had deposited Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt,Exs.C1 to C6 on 21.4.2010 with Sahara India Pariwar, further it is admitted by the OPs that the date of maturity was 12.4.2020.The amount of maturity is not mentioned in Exs.C1 to C6. The complainant got converted the amount with Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited i.e. OP No.2 who issued receipt Ex.C7 for Rs.22,700/- dated 16.10.2012, receipt ,Ex.C8 dated 17.10.2012 for Rs.20,050/-,  receipt,Ex.C9 dated 20.10.2012 for Rs.22,700/-, receipt Ex.C10 dated 19.10.2012 for Rs.22,700/-, receipt dated 18.10.2012 for Rs.22,700/-, receipt,Ex.C12 dated 22.10.2012 for Rs.22,700/-. The complainant was asked to convert the amount with Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Limited i.e. OP No.3 for which the complainant agreed and was issued receipts,Ex.C13 to C18 i.e. receipts Exs.C13,C14,C15,C16,C18 for Rs.22,700/- dated 7.8.2018. These receipts mention the date of maturity as 7.8.2020 with maturity value as Rs.28,475/-each. Receipt,Ex.C17 is for Rs.20,050/- which mentions the date of maturity as 7.8.2020 and maturity amount as Rs.25,151/-.Vide these receipt it is proved that complainant deposited total amount of Rs.1,33,550/- with the OPs of which the maturity amount comes to Rs.167,526/-.
16.  It not disputed by the OPs that the CC had deposited the aforesaid amount or that the amount was not payable after the period of maturity. It is on record that the OPs did not make payment to the CC after the due date.
17. The objections that have been taken by the OPs are that the CC is a member of the society i.e. OP No.2 and hence it is a relationship between a member and society. Therefore, the jurisdiction of Consumer Commission is barred and the jurisdiction falls under the Co-operative Societies Act,2008. It is pertinent to mention here that as stated in Savitri Devi Vs. M/s Saharayan Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd. and others decided by the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab ,Chandigarh on 21.6.2021, that “the dispute is with regard to the dispute of amount under the scheme of the OPs for a particular period and the refund of the same alongwith benefits . As such the same  certainly amounts to rendering of service as defined in the Act. There is an element of deficiency in service, as well as unfair trade practice due to non performance of the contract, whereby services of the OPs have been hired by the complainant by depositing the above said amount with them. It is further held that the OPs have not complied with the terms and conditions of the scheme by not refunding the amount deposited by the CC alongwith due benefits. There is no dispute between the complainant and OPs with regard to management and governance of the society. Hence the contention that the present complaint is barred by jurisdiction does not hold any ground.
18. Moreover as per Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 and now Section 100 of the Consumer Protection Act,2019 the remedy available before the Consumer Fora /Commission is an additional remedy. Further as stated by the OPs that the said dispute is maintainable before the Arbitrator or the Registrar also stands nullified in view of our above discussion and also as held by the Apex Court in  M/s Emaar MGF Ltd. Vs. Aftaab,2018 SCC 2378  that consumer disputes are non arbitrable and in  SMC Global Securities Ltd. Vs. Anil Kastimal & 2 Ors. III (2022) CPJ 224 (NC) in which the Hon’ble National Commission has held that “4(i) Consumer  Protection Act,1986- Sec.2(1)(d),21(d)-Consumer Fixed Deposit-Deposit of money in a Fixed Deposit Account cannot be termed as commercial transaction – Submission of petitions that complainants are not consumers is rejected, respectively.
19. Further our view is substantiated by the cases as held in Secretary Thirumurugan Co.Op Agri Credit Society Vs. Lalita (Dead) (2004)CPJ 1(SC)  and Virendar Jain Vs. Alkananda Co-Op Group Housing Society CA No. 64 of 2010. Moreover, the deficiency in service where the petitioner has failed to pay the maturity value of the fixed deposits is within jurisdiction of the Consumer Commission as stated in  Kiran Krishna Agro Tech. Ltd. Vs. Smt.P.V.Santha Kumari (RP No.4229/2007). So we come to the conclusion that the present complaint is maintainable before the Consumer Commission and is within territorial jurisdiction as the complainant resides within the territorial jurisdiction of this Consumer Commission and the amount was invested in fixed deposits certificates through the office of the authorized representative of OP No.2 at Patiala.
20. Therefore, the contentions of the OPs that the CC has no identity separate from the society and that member is a part of society holds no ground. Further by not refunding the amount provided by the complainant in investment certificates, what to say of refund of the maturity value speaks of not only deficiency in service but also financial loss, agony, mental harassment and pain to the CC, which further negates all the objections made by the OPs on the ground that the CC has made a false and baseless statement; that CC has not approached the Consumer Commission with clean hands; that he cannot get benefit or claim beyond the terms and conditions of the certificate and has acted falsely.
21. Further the OPs have stressed the additional plea that the CC had made declaration to abide by the conditions of the scheme, as such the conditions are binding upon the CC. We find that it is the OPs who have not honoured their own agreement and rather have put the blame on the CC without any justification.
22. The complaint is partly allowed and we order the OPs to refund to the complainant the maturity amount as mentioned in the receipts Exs.C13 to C18 totaling to Rs.1,67,526/- alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of maturity till realization. The OPs are further direction to pay the amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation , for causing mental agony, pain, harassment and financial loss to the complainant. The OPs are also burdened with Rs.5000/- to be paid to the complainant as litigation expenses. The order  be complied with by the OPs within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.           
23.           The instant complaint could not be disposed of within stipulated period due to vacancy in the Quorum.
85109252238716.  
85109252238717.  

                                              G.S.Nagi                          GAGANDEEP GOSAL

                                              Member                          President