Haryana

Ambala

CC/155/2022

Smt Chander Lekha Aggarwal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Umesh Mital

10 Jan 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

Complaint case no.	:	155  of 2022
Date of Institution	:	24.05.2022
Date of decision	:	10.01.2024

 

Chander Lekha Aggarwal wife of Shri Shiv Kumar Aggarwal, aged about 70 years, at present R/o 44, Palam Vihar, Ambala Cantt.

……. Complainant.

                                                Versus

1. Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited, Through its Managing Director Shri Subrata Roy, Head Office: Sahara India Bhawan, Sahara India Centre, # 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226 024.

 

2. Humara India Credit Co-operative Society Limited, Through its Managing Director Shri Subrata Roy, Regd. Office: Mangal Jyoti, 101, 227/2, AJC Bose Road, Kolkata, West Bengal-700 020.

 

3. Sahara India Parivar Limited, Through its Regional Manager, Regional Office: GT Road, Gohana Road, Panipat-132 103.

 

4. Sahara India Parivar Limited, through its Branch Manager, Sector Office: Sahara India Pariwar, # 5744-46, 1^st Floor, Nicholson Road, Ambala Cantt-133 001.

 

5. Sahara India Parivar Limited, Through its Branch Manager, Branch Office: Sahara India Pariwar, Durga Mandir Road, Lalru, District Mohalli-140 506 (Pb.)  

.…. Opposite Parties.

 Before:         Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                      Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

            Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.           

 

Present:       Shri Rohit Mittal, Advocate, counsel for the complainant

                     OPs No.1 to 3 & 5 already ex parte.

                   Shri Manish Sharma, Advocate, counsel for OP No.4.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’), praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

1. To pay Rs.6,27,200/-, against the deposits receipt No.665005535908 and also to make the payment of Rs.8,22,116/- against the Joining points issued under Account No.53627400007 both issued vide certificate No.438000307206 i.e total sum of Rs.14,49,316/-, alongwith interest @ 15.5% per annum, on the same from the date of due i.e 28.05.2020, till the date of its actual payment.
2. To pay Rs.50,000/- on account of causing delay in making payment, mental agony and harassment.  
3. To pay Rs.35,000/- as litigation expenses.
382.  
383. any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deems fit.

 

2.             Brief facts of this case are that on 23.07.2012, complainant invested Rs.5,00,000/-, vide receipt No.071010893291 with the OPs in their “Advance for Q Shops Goods Plan H” Scheme in which the OPs  allured the people to take deposits and to give a handsome return on the same on maturity. As per the said scheme after 6 years if no cash back is taken by the investor during the said period, the maturity amount will be Rs.11,77,175/-, as committed by the local representative of OP no.4. The abovesaid investment was deposited with OP No.4 being the local office of OPs No.1 to 3. On maturity of the abovesaid scheme in the year 2018, instead of making payment to the complainant, the local representative of OP No.4 allured the complainant that if the amount is re-invested in other scheme for 2 years it will be more beneficial and attracted the complainant by high returns on maturity. Believing the same, the complainant re-invested the maturity on 28.05.2018. The local representative of OP no.4 on his own out of the abovesaid maturity amount, for the Principal amount i.e Rs.5,00,000/- issued a fresh deposits receipt No.665005535908, certificate no.438000307206, Hologram No.992701099973 dated 28.05.2018 under the Membership No.653628000006 of OP No.2 for 24 months and the maturity date on 28.05.2020, on which the OPs undertook to pay Rs.6,27,200/- on maturity. The local representative of OP No.4 for the remaining benefits in the shape of interest amount accrued on Rs.5,00,000/- upto 23.05.2018 got issued a separate certificate under the same certificate number i.e. 438000307206, membership No.653628000006 and Account No.53627400007 of Op No.2 for 6553 Joining Points and the maturity date of the same was also 28.05.2020 on which OP No.2 undertook to pay Rs.100/- (appx.) for each joining points which will be increased to 8221 joining points on maturity and as such the complainant was to get Rs.8,22,116/- at the time of maturity as assured by the OPs at the time of issuing the certificate. Both the abovesaid certificates for which the principal amount was initially deposited by the complainant at Ambala Cantt vide receipt No.071010893291 dated 23.07.2012 issued from the office of OP No.4 at Ambala Cantt and in the year 2018, the local representative of OP no.4 got the abovesaid certificates issued from the office of OP no.5, which is a branch office of Op No.4, at Ambala Cantt.  The Complainant had contacted local office of OP no.4 as well as the branch Manager of Op no.5 i.e Shri Charanjeet Singh being the local resident of Ambala Cantt many times to pay the amount due under the abovesaid deposits and certificates alongwith the benefits as assured by the representative but the local staff of the OPs has been putting off the complainant on one pretext or the other by alleging that due to paucity of funds they are not in a position to pay the amount and the amount due will be paid after some time on receiving funds from the higher authorities. Complainant served a legal notice dated 27.04.2022, upon the OPs, but to no avail. Hence, the present complaint.
3.           Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of the OPs No.1 to 3 and 5, before this Commission, therefore, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 14.11.2022.
4.           Upon notice, OP No.4 appeared and filed written version wherein various objections were taken to the effect that the complainant is not a consumer of the OPs, as there is no relation of consumer and service provider between them; that for any dispute between society and its member, consumer complaint is not maintainable. In Ms. Anjana Abraham Chambethil Vs. The Managing Diretor, The Koothattukulam Farmers Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., NCDRC759@2013) 4 CPJ 333 (NC) the Hon'ble National has held that the consumer forum have no jurisdiction to try the dispute arising between co-operative society and its members. As per Section 3 (N) of The Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002 definition of member is (Member means a person joining in the application for the registration of a multi State Co-operative Society and includes a person admitted to membership after such registration in accordance with the provisions of this Act, the rules and the byelaws).  As per Section 55 of The Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002, A Multi State Co-operative Society shall have a charge on the share or contribution or interest in the capital and on the deposits of a member or past or deceased member and on any dividend, bonus or profits payable to a member or past member or the estate of a deceased member to the society and may set-off any sum credited or payable to a member or past member or the estate of deceased member in or towards payment of any such debt. As per Section 83 of The Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002, Central Registrar has power to make an order after inquiry to repay or restore the money or property or any part thereof, with interest at such rate, or to pay contribution and costs or compensation to such extent, as the Central Registrar may consider just and equitable. The complainant himself violated the rules of the society mentioned in Section 25 (5) of The Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002 that it shall be the duty of every member of a multi State Co- operative Society to promote and protect the interests and objects of such society. As per byelaws of the society, it is clearly mentioned that any dispute between the society and its member/ account holder should be decided by the arbitrator. The OPs are always ready to make the payment as per the conditions of scheme but due to enhance demand of interest on maturity amount the payment could not be made to the complainant at that time.  Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by OP No.4 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.
5.           Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of the complainant as Annexure CW1/A alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 & C-10 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant. However, it is pertinent to mention here that the OP No.4 failed to lead any evidence despite availing various opportunities, therefore, evidence of the OP No.4 have been closed by the order of this Commission on 13.10.2023.
6.           We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and learned counsel for the OP no.4 and have also carefully gone through the case file.
7.           Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that by neither making payment of maturity amounts under the certificates in question nor paying interest thereon, the OPs have deficient in providing service, for which they need to be penalized. 
8.           On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP No.4 while relying upon the case Pinak Pani Mohanty Versus Union of India and Others with W.P.(C)No.6/2023(X),( 29.03.2023 passed in I.A. bearing No.56308 of 2023 in Writ Petition(Civil) No.191 of 2022) decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court has submitted that as per this order, the question of genuineness of the claims of the depositors/investors with the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies  is to be exclusively determined by the Special Authority and the manner and modalities for making the payment is to be worked out by it in consultation with  Hon’ble Justice R. Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of the Apex Court and Sh. Gaurav Agarwal, Amicus Curiae and for that purpose an amount of Rs.5000/- Crores has been ordered to be transferred  to the Special Authority out of “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”  for further disbursal of the same against legitimate dues  of the depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative  Societies. As such, in compliance of the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the proceedings of the present complaint may be closed.
9.           Perusal of receipt Annexure C-2, reveals that the stamp of Sahara India Pariwar has been affixed on it and certificates Annexure C-3 and C-4, issued by the Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Limited bears the logo of Unit of Sahara India Pariwar. Meaning thereby, the Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited and Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Limited are the units of Sahara India Pariwar. We have gone through the contents of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court titled as Pinak Pani Mohant  Vs.  Union of  India &  Ors (supra), which are reproduced hereunder:-

 “3.        Having heard Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the Union of India and taking into consideration the facts narrated hereinabove and when it is reported that Rs. 2253 Crores had been taken out of the Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., i.e., one of the four Sahara Group Multi-State Cooperative Societies and deposited with SEBI in the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account” and the amount lying in the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account” is lying unutilized and the genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies, which otherwise, shall be entitled to get back their money, the prayer sought in the present application seems to be reasonable and which shall be in the larger public interest / interest of the genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies. Therefore, the present application stands disposed of with the following directions:-

Out of the total amount of Rs. 24,979.67 Crores lying in the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”, Rs. 5000 Crores 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 accounts directly.

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.

X xxxx xxx xx. Xxxx xxx

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. 5,000 Crores at the earliest, but not later than nine months from today. The balance amount thereafter be again transferred to the “Sahara-SEBI Refund Account”. 

From the aforesaid judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court titled as Pinak Pani Mohant  Vs.  Union of  India &  Ors (supra), it is clear that the question of genuineness of the claims of the depositors/investors with the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies  is to be exclusively determined by the Special Authority and the manner and modalities for making the payment is to be worked out by it in consultation with  Hon’ble Justice R. Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of the Apex Court and Sh. Gaurav Agarwal, Amicus Curiae and for that purpose an amount of Rs.5000/- Crores has been ordered to be transferred  to the Special Authority out of “Sahra-SEBI Refund Account”  for further disbursal of the same against legitimate dues  of the depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative  Societies.  Since, in the present case also, the complainant’s claim before this Commission is with regard to non-payment of the amounts deposited with the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies, therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that no authority including this Commission has the power to decide the genuineness of claim or pass directions for disbursal of the claim except the Special Authority authorized by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide the aforesaid order.

10.           In view of foregoing discussion and in compliance of the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, as aforesaid, the proceedings of the instant complaint is closed with liberty to the complainant to approach the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies (Special Authority) for determination of her claim and disbursal of the same. Accordingly, the present complaint stand disposed off.  Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned as per rules.  File be annexed and consigned to the record room.         

  Announced:- 10.01.2024

 

(Vinod Kumar Sharma)	(Ruby Sharma)	(Neena Sandhu)
Member	Member	President