DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: BHADRAK

Dated the 2nd day of February, 2021

C.D Case No. 90 of 2020

                                        Present 1. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Presiding Member

                                                     2. Afsara Begum, Member

Manikalata Panda

W/O Bibhusen Panda

At- Near Akankshya ITI Naripur

Po/Ps/District- Bhadrak                                            …………..  Complainant

                                                                      Versus

1. The Branch Manager, Sahara India Pariwar

At- Kar Market Complex, 2^nd Floor, By-Pass

Po/Dist: Bhadrak, Pin- 756100

2. The Manager, Sahara India Regional Office

Near Chandini Chowak,

Boxi-Bazar, Cuttack

3. The General Manager, Sahara India

Territory Office/Area Office,

Plot No. 50, Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar

                                                                                              …….OPPOSITE PARTIES

Counsel For Complainant: Sri Basanta Kumar Mohanty, Adv & Others

Counsel For the OPs        :  Ex-parte

Date of hearing:   01.02.2021

Date of order:       02.02.2021

BASANTA KUMAR MALLICK, PRESIDING MEMBER

               This dispute arises out of a complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice against the O.Ps. The facts of the complaint are to the effect that the complainant is a bonifide depositor under Sahara Credit Co-Op. Ltd., popularly known as SAHARA INDIA LTD, a non-banking financial institution accepting deposit from the common people in shape of term/fixed deposit for a specific period. Being motivated by the Sector Manager with a promise and assurance for alluring return, the complainant deposited a sum Rs 15,337/- in one fixed deposit account for a period of 18 months which were matured on 01.06.2020. The total amount deposited by the complainant was Rs 15,337/- as against which the complainant was to receive Rs 17,960/- on the date of maturity. But the O.Ps did not pay the entire amount in the said accounts on the date of maturity. As such the O.Ps are liable to pay Rs 17,960/- as on the date of maturity. The details of deposit and maturity value are mentioned here under in a table.

                   That after the date of maturity, the complainant has time and again requested the Sector Manager and Territorial Head for payment of maturity value but all of his efforts became fruitless as neither the Sector Manager nor the Territorial Head paid any heed to his request which amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. Being aggrieved with the attitude and behavior of the officers in position, the complainant filed this case requesting proper adjudication and disposal of the case with a direction to the O.Ps for payment of maturity value together with future interest as on the date of payment along with cost & compensation. The complainant has also served legal notice on the O.Ps for payment of maturity value which is not responded by them. 

                  Even though the O.Ps have received the notice issued by this Commission, they did not turn up to appear before the Commission nor submitted any written version after sufficient opportunities given. Finally this Commission understood that the O.Ps are hesitant to appear before the Commission and submit written version for which the O.Ps are set ex-parte due to non appearance and the complainant was directed for ex-parte hearing on dt. 01.02.2021.

                     It is observed from the record and material evidences adduced by the complainant that he has deposited the amount of Rs 15,337/- in one fixed deposit account as mentioned in the above table. The said account has been matured on 01.06.2020 as per table but the O.Ps did not pay any amount against maturity value to the complainant in spite of repeated request and persuasions.

                    From the above facts and circumstances it is understood that the O.Ps have intentionally and deliberately caused delay in payment of the maturity value of the above mentioned account which leads to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. It is also felt that the amount deposited by the complainant was his hard earned money saved/invested with the O.Ps to meet the expenses of his future requirements.

             In  C.D. Case No. 71 of 2003  in the case of  Lt. Viju Samuel Vrs M/S Associate Roadways Carriers Ltd (98 (2004) CLT 9 (O S C)   decided on 6.8.2003  Hon’ble  State Commission Odisha  held that :

                    “Absence of O.Ps through notices are held sufficient – O.Ps set ex parte since previous dates- No Written version – State Commission to accept the uncontroverted statement of complainant- Assessment of loss – O.Ps liable to Pay”.           

                       Therefore it is felt necessary to allow the case for payment of the maturity value as mentioned in the above table together with future interest and cost & compensation.                                                                                     

​ORDER

                     In the result, the complaint be and the same is allowed against the O.Ps with cost and compensation. O.Ps are directed to pay maturity value of Rs 17,960/- along with future interest as would be calculated charging interest as admissible to the fixed deposit accounts. Further the O.Ps are directed to pay compensation of Rs 2,000/- for mental agony and harassment and Rs 1,000/- towards cost of litigation. This order must be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt order failing which additional 7% interest P.A shall be charged on the awarded amount from the date of order till the date of payment. 

                     This order is pronounced in the open Court on this day of 2^nd   February, 2021 under my hand and seal of the Commission.