Deputy Registrar The Bhikhi Cooperative Agri. Service Society
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
1. Sh S.M.S Mahil 2. Sh Sarat Chanderl
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANSA. Complaint No.06/15.01.2008 Decided on : 16.04.2008 Rajpreet Singh S/o Sh.Joginder Singh, resident of Near Bus Stand, Bhikhi, District Mansa. ..... Complainant. VERSUS 1.The Bhikhi Co-operative Agricultural Service Society Ltd., Bhikhi through its President/Secretary. 2. Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Mansa. ..... Opposite Parties. Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. ..... Present: Sh.S.K.Singla, counsel for the complainant. Sh.B.D.Jindal., counsel for the opposite parties. Before: Sh.S.M.S.Mahil, President. Sh.Sarat Chander, Member. ORDER: Rajpreet Singh (hereinafter called as the complainant) has filed the present complaint against The Bhikhi Co-operative Agricultural Service Society Ltd., Bhikhi through its President/Secretary, as well as the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Mansa (hereinafter called as OP No.1 & 2, respectively) for issuance of a direction to the opposite parties to revive his account in the Society and also pay him Rs.5,000/- as compensation along with Rs.2,000/- as litigation costs. Admitted facts of this complaint are that the complaint being a Contd........2 : 2 : member of the OP No.1 Society, was entitled to certain facilities including the loan from OP No.1. It is alleged by the complainant that his account was being regularly maintained and he had never defaulted in the re-payment of the loan with regard to the supply of the fertilizers etc on credit. However, the opposite parties had closed his account without giving any notice or disclosing the reasons about it. Thus, the complainant was deprived of the facility of receiving the necessary goods from the Society on credit. Repeated requests of the complainant to the opposite parties to restore the facility to him have failed. The complainant thus alleges to have suffered mental, as well as physical harassment on account of the deficiency in service by the opposite parties towards the complainant. Hence this complaint. In the written version filed by the opposite parties, the maintainability of the complaint was challenged on the ground that the complainant was not their consumer, as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and that no deficiency in service by the opposite parties towards the complainant was established. The jurisdiction of this Forum to entertain and try this complaint was also alleged to have been barred under the Provisions of the Cooperative Societies Act, 1961. On merits, it was not denied that the complainant, being the member of the Society, was having an account with OP No.1. However, it was contended that there was a dispute between the complainant and the cashier of the Society about the re-payment of certain loan and the matter had been referred to S.Gurjant Singh, Arbitrator, who had given the award in favour of the complainant. Earlier the facility of the credit had been withdrawn, but his membership had not been struck. After the award by the Arbitrator, the Deputy Registrar, as well as the Assistant Registrar, Contd........3 : 3 : Cooperative Societies had ordered to restore the credit facility to the complainant subject to his furnishing an affidavit that in case the award of the arbitrator was set-aside by any court, the Society shall be entitled to recover this amount from the complainant. The complainant did not furnish the said affidavit which amounts to violation of the orders of the higher authorities. The opposite parties have further stated that they were still ready to restore the loan facility to the complainant in case he furnishes his affidavit. It was denied that there was any deficiency in service by the opposite parties towards the complainant. A prayer for dismissal of the complaint was accordingly made. Both the parties have led their respective evidence in the shape of affidavits and documents. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and carefully scrutinized the entire evidence placed on record. From the facts of this complaint, it is evident that as per award of the Arbitrator, the complainant was not a defaulter of the Society. In such circumstances, the opposite parties were under a legal obligation to restore the credit facilities to him straight way. If ultimately the award of the Arbitrator was set aside by any competent court and the complainant was held liable to make the payment, he could be called upon to clear the account and had the complainant failed to comply with the directions of the Society or the higher authorities, the facility could be withdrawn again or the amount due from him could be recovered from him in accordance with the law. The demand of an affidavit from the complainant in advance regarding his undertaking to pay the amount, if the arbitration award was set aside, is totally arbitrary and unjustified. A legal right of the Contd........4 : 4 : complainant, who was the member of the Society, could not be taken away on mere apprehensions. The opposite parties thus are deficient in service towards the complainant in that regard. As a consequence of the foregoing reasons, we are constrained to allow this complaint with a direction to the opposite parties to immediately restore the loan facility to the complainant which he was enjoying earlier without the furnishing of any affidavit by him. The opposite parties are also burdened with Rs.1,000/- as costs of litigation. The opposite parties may proceed against the complainant in accordance with law if the award of the Arbitrator is set-aside at any stage. Compliance of the order be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order which shall be supplied to the parties free of charges under the rules and file be arranged, indexed and consigned to record. Pronounced: 16.04.2008 Sarat Chander, S.M.S.Mahil, Member. President.
