Haryana

Panchkula

CC/118/2022

PAWAN KUMAR SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE BRANCH MANAGER SAHARA CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD - Opp.Party(s)

SANJEEV

10 Jan 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  PANCHKULA.

 

Consumer Complaint No	:	118 of 2022
Date of Institution	:	08.04.2022
Date of Decision	:	10.01.2023

Pawan Kumar Sharma aged 54 years son of Shri Hans Ram, resident of House No.187, Sector-19, Panchkula.                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ….Complainant

Versus

1.     The Branch Manager Sahara  Credit Cooperative Society Limited SCO-1110-1111, Sector-22-B, Chandigarh

2.     Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited through its Director/ Managing Director Regd. Office Sahara India Bhawan-1, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj Lucknow.

….Opposite Parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,  2019.

Before:      Sh.Satpal, President.

Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini, Member.

Dr.Sushma Garg, Member.  

 

Present:     Sh. Sanjeev Malhotra, Advocate along with complainant.

                OPs No.1 & 2 already ex-parte vide order dated 27.06.2022.     

ORDER

(Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini, Member)  

1.     Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a sum of Rs.86,643/- was invested by the complainant in OP’s scheme vide certificate no.787002130650 and account no.23977203775 on 01.12.2018. The details of the above deposited amount are given as under:-

Sr.No.	Complainant’s name	Certificate no.	Account no.	Amount deposited &  date  of deposit	Amount/ Date of maturity
1	Pawan Kumar Sharma	787002130650	23977203775	Rs.86643/-01.12.2018	101459/-01.06.2020

In addition to above, the complainant had made investment in Sahara Minor Scheme, wherein a sum of Rs.500/- was to be deposited on regular basis, vide account no.23977801738 and membership no.23971402225. The details of deposited amount in the said scheme are given in tabular form as under:-

Sr.No.	Complainant’s name	Membership no.	Account no.	Total Amount deposited	Period of maturity/ Date of maturity
1	Pawan Kumar Sharma	23971402225	23977801738	146000/-	12 months/  15.10.2020

A legal notice was sent through Sh.Sanjeev Malhotra, Advocate on 20.12.2021 to the OPs but the Ops did not given any reply of the said legal notice. It is alleged that after the maturity of the said FD and the daily deposits, the complainant contacted the opposite parties and requested to release the said amount but the Ops always postponed the matter on one pretext or the other. Due to non release of the maturity amount as well as the daily deposited amount i.e. total sum of Rs. 2,47,459/- by the OPs, the complainant is facing great hardships. Further, the Ops had illegally kept the maturity amount of the complainant with ulterior motive in order to grab the amount of the complainant. Due to the act and conduct of the OPs, the complainant has suffered a great mental agony, physical harassment and financial loss; hence, the present complaint

2.             Notice was issued to the OPs No.1 & 2 through registered post, which was not received back either served or unserved despite the expiry of 30 days from the issuance of notices to OPs No.1 & 2; hence, they were deemed to be served and thus, due to non appearance of OPs No.1 & 2, they were proceeded ex-parte by this Commission vide its order dated 27.06.2022.

3.             The complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure C/A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-5 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement.

4.             We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the record minutely and carefully.

5.             During the arguments, the learned counsel for the complainant reiterating the averments made in the complaint as also in the affidavit Annexure C-A has prayed for acceptance of the complaint by granting relief as claimed for in the complaint.

6.             The OP No.1 & 2 have preferred not to contest the present complaint by remaining absent despite services of notice and accordingly, they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 27.06.2022 and thus, the assertions made by the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.

7.             Before looking into the merits of the case, we deem it proper to discuss the legal position whether the complaint is maintainable before the Commission.  The issue came up for discussion before the Full Bench of Hon’ble National Commission, comprising of its three members, in case titled as Smt. Kalawati & Ors. Vs. M/s United Vaish Co-operative, Revision Petition No.823 to 826 of 2001(NC) held as under:-

        “Member of the Society has certain rights in the Society like attending its meeting and right to vote. A member is a separate entity from the Co-operative Society which is just like a shareholder as in the company registered under the Companies Act, 1986. Here is the society of which the complainants are members, invited deposits and pays interest and is to refund the amount with interest on maturity. Society provides facilities in connection with financing and is, certainly, rendering services to its members and here is a member who avails of such services. When there is a fault on the part of the society and itself is not paying the amount on fixed deposit receipts, on maturity, there is certainly deficiency in services by the society and a complaint is maintainable against society by the members as complainant”.

8.             Moreover, it is well settled law that remedy before the Consumer Forum is in addition to and not in derogation to the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Reliance in this regard, may be placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in “Secretary, Thirumurugan Co-operative Agricultural Credit Society Vs. M.Lalitha(Dead) through LRs and others”, 2004(1) CLT 456 in which it was held as under:-

12.     As per Section 3  of the Act,  as already  stated  above  the provisions of the Act  shall be in addition  to and  not in derogation to any  other provisions of any  other law for the time being  in force. Having  due regard to the scheme of the Act  and purpose  sought  to be achieved to protect  the interest  of the consumers, better  the provisions  are to be  interpreted  broadly, positively and purposefully in the context  of the present case to give meaning to additional/extended jurisdiction, particularly when Section3 seeks to provide remedy  under the Act in addition to other remedies provided under other Acts unless there is clear bar”.

9.             From the legal position as discussed above, it is clear that the complaint is maintainable before the Commission and the Commission has jurisdiction to adjudicate the controversy involved in the present complaint.

10.            Now, coming to the merits of the case, it is evident that a sum of Rs.86,643/-, which was deposited with the OPs vide certificate no.787002130650(Annexure C-1) as mentioned in the above table has matured on 01.06.2020 with the maturity amount as Rs.1,01,459/-. The non-payment of the maturity amount despite request made by the complainant followed by legal notice dated 20.12.2021(Annexure C-4) amounts to deficiency and indulgence of OPs into unfair trade practice. Similarly, the amount of Rs.1,46,000/- was deposited vide account no. 23977801738 has become payable after 15.10.2020. The OPs have failed to release the said amount i.e. Rs.2,47,459/-(Rs.101459+146000) to the complainant despite legal notice dated 20.12.2021. The deficiency and the unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs is apparent on the face of the record as they have failed to make the payment of maturity amount to the complainant.

11.            As a sequel to above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint with the following directions jointly and severally to the OPs No.1 & 2:-

1. The Ops are directed to make the payment of Rs.1,01,459/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9%(S.I.) per annum w.e.f. date of maturity i.e. 01.06.2020  till its actual realization.
2. The OPs are directed to make the payment of Rs.1,4,6000/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9% (S.I.) per annum w.e.f 15.10.2020 till its actual realization.
3. The OPs are also directed to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment.
4. The Ops are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,500/- as cost of litigation charges.

 

12.            The OPs No.1 & 2 shall comply with the order within a period of 45 days from the date of communication of copy of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Commission for initiation of proceedings under Section 71/72 of CP Act, against the OPs No.1 & 2. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced on:10.01.2023

 

 

Dr.Sushma Garg          Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini         Satpal         

           Member                          Member                     President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

                                         Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini                                

                                                Member