DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                                                                    Complaint No. 703

Instituted on:   16.12.2016

                                                                   Decided on:     18.04.2017

Mangat Ram son of Munnu Ram R/O Ward No.9B/168, Guru Nanak Nagar, Dhuri, Distt. Sangrur.

                                                        …. Complainant.      

                                         Versus

1.     SMD Premier Thrift and Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. Branch Office, Near Liberty Showroom Court Road, Sangrur through its Branch Manager.

2.     SMD Premier Thrift and Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. Head Office : Near Liberty show room, Court Road, Sangrur through its Managing Director.

             ….Opposite parties.

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:    Shri Parul Chawla, Advocate                          

FOR OPP. PARTIES           :     Shri G.S.Shergill, Advocate                     

Quorum

                   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                   Sarita Garg, Member

                   Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

ORDER:  

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

1.             Shri Mangat Ram, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that on the request of OPs, the complainant availed the services of the Ops by investing an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- in one time investment plan  vide registration number SMDP1117 on 13.6.2015 for 65 months and on maturity i.e. on 12.12.2020 the Ops were to pay an amount of Rs.4,00,000/-.  Further case of the complainant is that he came to know that the Ops are not paying the appropriate amount to customers as agreed upon by the Ops and a number of cases are pending in the Forum.  As such, the complainant opted for pre mature payment and deposited the original policy with the Ops, but the Ops did not pay the due amount despite serving of legal notice dated 4.11.2016.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as pre mature amount along with interest @ 18% per annum from 13.6.2015 till realization and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

2.             In reply filed by Ops, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the present complaint is not maintainable as OP is a society, that the complaint is pre mature, that the present complaint is not maintainable and that the complainant has filed the complaint with the sole motive to gain illegally.  On merits, it is stated that the complainant is not a consumer of the OP as the society has been formed by its members for the benefit and welfare of the society. It is stated that since the bond is to be matured on 12.12.2020, therefore there was no occasion for the complainant to submit the original bond.  Lastly, prayed for dismissal of the complaint with special costs.

3.             The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 affidavit, Ex.C-2 and Ex.C-3 postal receipts, Ex.C-4 copy of legal notice, Ex.C-5 copy of certificate and closed evidence. On merits, the learned counsel for OP number 1 has produced Ex.Op-1 affidavit, Ex.OP-2 copy of by laws and closed evidence.

4.             We have very carefully perused the pleadings of the parties, evidence produced on the file and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.

5.             From the perusal of documents placed on the file and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the complainant had invested an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- with the Ops and in turn the Ops issued the registration letter/bond certificate Ex.C-5, whereby it has been stated that the maturity amount on maturity will be Rs.4,00,000/-, as is evident from the document i.e. copy of bond certificate, which is on record as Ex.C-5. The complainant has further stated that though he was in requirement of the amount so invested with the Ops, as such has submitted the original certificate for payment, but the Ops did not return the so due amount to the complainant.  As such, we are of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if the Ops are directed to refund to the complainant the so deposited amount of Rs.2,00,000/-.

6.             So, in view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs to make the payment of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant  within a period of thirty days of receipt of copy of the order, failing which the Ops shall pay the amount along with interest @ 9% per annum from 13.6.2015.

7.               A copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.       

Pronounced.

                April 18, 2017.

                                                        (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                                President

                                                             (Sarita Garg)

                                                                 Member

                                                        (Vinod Kumar Gulati)

                                                                Member