DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, PUNJAB.

 

Complaint Case No : 79/2020

Date of Institution   : 12.03.2020

Date of Decision    : 25.01.2021

Rita Rani alias Ria Rani, aged about 43 years, daughter of Prem Pritam Jindal, now wife of Sushil Kumar resident of # 120, Ward No. 26, Jama Masjid Road, Malerkotla, District Sangrur.       

                      …Complainant

Versus

 

1. Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited, Registered Office Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapurthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024, through its Authorized Signatory/Managing Director. 

2. Sahara India Parivar, Branch Office Barnala, now shifted at Sahara India Parivar Sethi Complex, 3rd Floor, Near Modi College Chowk, Opposite Apollo Ground, Patiala-147001,  through its Branch Manager. 

 

               …Opposite Parties

Complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Present: Sh. Dhiraj Kumar counsel for complainant.

Sh. N.K. Garg counsel for opposite parties.

 

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Kuljit Singh : President

2.Sh. Tejinder Singh Bhangu : Member

 

(ORDER BY KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT):

The complainant namely Rita Rani alias Ria Rani has filed the present complaint under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date) against Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited and others (hereinafter referred as opposite parties).  

2. The facts leading to the present complaint are that the complainant has availed the services of opposite parties. It is alleged that the complainant has invested a total sum of Rs. 54,700/- in cash with the opposite party No. 2 at Barnala for 6 years on 26.9.2012 and it was agreed with the opposite parties and the complainant that the opposite parties will handover a sum of Rs. 1,71,211/- to the complainant on 26.9.2018 and in this regard the opposite parties issued one certificate. It is further alleged that according to the agreement and terms & conditions tried to submit the above said certificate in the office of opposite party No. 2 for the release of above said amount of Rs. 1,71,211/- on 26.9.2018. But the opposite party No. 2 refused to receive the same and has verbally told to the complainant that she will receive the same after some days when the payment will be made to the complainant. After some days the complainant visited the office of opposite party No. 2 for collecting the amount and depositing the above said certificate. It is further alleged that the Manager of the opposite party No. 2 told the complainant that the payment will be made on the next month. Thereafter, the complainant again visited the office of opposite party No. 2 but they linger on the matter on the one pretext or the other. Finally, the complainant served a legal notice dated 1.2.2020 to the opposite parties, but the opposite parties failed to give any reply. Thus, there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. Hence, the present complaint is filed for seeking the following reliefs.- 

1) To pay the amount of Rs. 1,71,211/- as per the agreement alongwith interest.

2) To pay Rs. 15,000/-  as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expenses.   

3. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite parties appeared and filed joint written version taking preliminary objections interalia on the grounds that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and the complaint is misconceived, baseless and unsustainable in the eyes of law. It is further averred that the complainant is not a 'consumer' of opposite parties. Further, the opposite party is a Society duly registered under “Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002” and the complainant is member of the Society. As such, for any dispute between Society and Member, consumer complaint is not maintainable. On merits, it is submitted that the complainant contacted the office of Society to become a member for participating in the scheme for taking/gaining benefit of Society. The complainant after understanding the terms and conditions, bylaws and objects of the society has become a member and shared the amount of Rs. 30,000/- on 4.8.2012 at Barnala office of the Society. It is further submitted that the complainant has concocted a story and has filed the present complaint claiming payment which is against the terms and conditions of the agreement. Moreover, the complainant has no right to claim against the terms of the agreement. It is further submitted that due to economic crisis and financial constraint the answering opposite parties was rendered unable to make the payment of contribution amount and its benefit at one go. As such, the complainant was asked to receive the payment in part/installment, but she willfully refused to receive the same in part. So, due to this reason the above said payment could not have been made. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on their part and prayed for the dismissal of complaint.  

4. In support of her case the complainant tendered into evidence her own affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of receipt  Ex.C-2, copy of legal notice Ex.C-3, postal receipts Ex.C-4 & Ex.C-5. Ld. Counsel for complainant on 5.11.2020 has made statement that he does not want to submit rejoinder on behalf of complainant and closed the evidence.

5. On the other hand, to rebut the case of the complainant the opposite parties have failed to tender any evidence and the evidence of opposite parties is closed by the order of this Commission dated 20.10.2020. 

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on file. 

7. In order to prove her case the complainant has placed on record her detailed affidavit Ex.C-1, in which she reiterated the averments as mentioned in the complaint. She has further placed on record copy of receipt Ex.C-2, which shows that an amount of Rs. 54,700/- has been invested in the Sahara Q Shop Plan-H on 26.9.2012. She has further placed on record photocopy of legal notice Ex.C-3 and the Ex.C-4 & Ex.C-5 are the postal receipts. 

8. However, on the receipt Ex.C-2 nothing has been mentioned that the above said amount of Rs. 54,700/- has been deposited for a period of six years as claimed by the complainant in her complaint. Further, on Ex.C-2 nothing has been mentioned about the rate of interest. So, we are unable to understand that how the complainant has calculated the amount of Rs. 1,71,211/- as claimed by the complainant in her complaint. So, we are of the view that the complainant has failed to prove that she has deposited the amount of Rs. 54,700/- with the opposite parties as fixed deposit for six years as claimed by the complainant. But, on the other hand there is nothing on record from the side of opposite parties to rebut the case of the complainant by producing any cogent and reliable evidence.  

9. As a result of the above discussion, the present complaint is partly allowed and opposite parties are directed to pay the amount of Rs. 54,700/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of deposit i.e. 26.9.2012 till its realization. Compliance of the order be made within the period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.   

  ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

       25th Day of January, 2021 

 

 

            (Kuljit Singh)

            President             

 

(Tejinder Singh Bhangu)

Member