Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 218
Instituted on : 07.07.2020
Decided on : 11.04.2023
Atul age 44 years, s/o Sh. Ashok Kumar R/o VPO Bhainsru Khurd, Tehsil-Sampla, District Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Sahara India Sector Office Rohtak 2nd Floor Ganga Place Complex, Subhash Road, Rohtak Through its Sector Manager.
- Saharayan Universal Multipurpose Society Limited. Regd. Office 195, Zone-1, Infront of DB Mall, MP Nagar, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. Pin-462011. Through its concerned official/Director.
- Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara, Chairman, Sahara India, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024.
- Mr. OP Shrivastava, Dy Chairman, Sahara India, 1 Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024.
- Mr. Parshant Kumar Verma, Executive Director, Rastriya SAHARA Press, C-3, C-4, Sector-11, NOIDA(UP) PIN-201301.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR.TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh. Anil Balhara, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Jasvir Kundu, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that opposite party no. 1 is Sector Office of Sahara India and opposite party no. 2 is the society in which opposite parties took deposits of complainant with the assurance to give more interest than the Nationalised Bank. Opposite parties no.3 & 4 are the main persons, who are responsible for day to day working of Sahara India. Further opposite party no. 5 is the relative of the opposite party no. 4 and he is main person who is acting on the directions of the opposite party no. 3 and 4 who is responsible in with holding the amount of complainant and other depositors and opposite parties no. 5 is building pressure on the workers and employees of Sahara India to force the consumers to re-invest their maturity amount in other schemes run by opposite parties. Opposite parties invited the complainant to deposit money in schemes run under the name of the opposite parties no. 2 through opposite party no. 1 on the planning and control of opposite parties no. 3 & 4. The complainant had deposited his hard earned money and commission in different schemes which were launched by opposite parties with different names and under different societies. The detail of the Society name, schemes, amount, maturity date etc. are given below:-
Sr. No. | Initial amount in rupees | Certificate No./Account No. | Date of Maturity | Maturity amount in Rupees | Scheme & Name of Society |
1. | 22,447/- | 85000694231 | 29/01/2019 | 34,479 | SUPER BB (OP No. 2) |
It is further submitted that the officials of the opposite parties assured the complainant that all the payments will be made on date of maturity or on demand. All the payments were made by complainant at the office of opposite party no. 1. Since the date of maturity the complainant is wandering in the office of opposite party no.1 on regular intervals but no payment is made. Due to non-payment of maturity amount by the opposite parties, the complainant is suffering from great mental tension and harassment. It is further submitted that opposite parties are pressurized to renew/redeposit the due amount in different schemes for further period. But the complainant is in need of money, so he refused to further deposit in new schemes of opposite parties. So, the complainant approached the office of opposite party no. 1 on several times and requested them to give his all deposited amount with interest. But opposite party did not pay any heed towards the genuine requests of complainant. The act and conduct of the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to release the deposited amount alongwith interest @18% p.a. from the date of demand till the date of actual realization and also to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed their joint reply and submitted that there is no relation of consumer and service provider between the complainant and the opposite party. The opposite parties no.1 & 2 are society duly registered under “Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002” and the complainant is a member of society. Thus relation between the complainant and opposite party is of Member and Society. The complainant never approached the opposite parties and requested for release of maturity amount. It is also submitted that the complainant did not provide any document as alleged by him, therefore the complainant is bound to deliver the documents to the opposite parties and after receiving the same the opposite parties shall be able to submit their reply. The opposite parties never assured the complainant that the amount shall be released within days. The complainant is not entitled to get Rs.1,01,820/- alongwith interest @ 18% and compensation prayed by him. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite parties prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, document Ex.C1 and closed his evidence on 17.01.2022. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for opposite parties have availed several opportunities for filing evidence but has failed to do so. As such, evidence of opposite parties was closed vide order dated 29.11.2022 of this Commission.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case it is not disputed that as per receipt Ex.C1, dated 29.01.2016, complainant had deposited the amount of Rs.22447/- with the opposite parties and the date of maturity is 29.01.2019 and the maturity amount is 34479/-. After the maturity of accounts, complainant requested the opposite parties to refund the alleged amount alongwith interest but the alleged amount has not been paid to the complainant despite his repeated requests. On the other hand, the opposite parties through their reply have submitted that the complainant has failed to fulfill the required formalities of payment. But to prove their contention, opposite parties have not filed any document and also failed to adduce their evidence, which shows that they have nothing to say in the matter and all the allegations leveled by the complainant against the opposite parties stands proved. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and opposite parties no.1 to 5 are liable to refund the alleged amount to the complainant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party no.1 to 5 to pay the maturity amount of FDR Ex.C1 amounting to Rs.34479/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from dated 29.01.2019 to till its realization. Opposite party No.1 to 5 are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
11.04.2023.
..................................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
…………………………………..
Tripti Pannu, Member.
………………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member.
