DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: BHADRAK

Dated the 22nd day of February, 2021

C.D Case No. 68 of 2019

                                        Present 1. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Presiding Member

                                                     2. Afsara Begum, Member

Ajaya Kumar Nayak

S/O Suryamani Nayak

At/Po- Rajpur Tihidi, Ps- Bhadrak (R), District- Bhadrak- 756181                            

                                                                                          …………..  Complainant

                                                                      Versus

1. The Branch Manager, Sahara India Corporation Ltd. Bhadrak Branch, Bhadrak

At- Bhadrak, Po/Ps- Bhadrak (T), Dist: Bhadrak

2. The Chief Executive and Chainman, HAMARA INDIA CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY Ltd.

Mangal Jyoti No. 101-227/2, X AJC, Bose Road, Kolkata- 700020, West Bengal

3. Ramesh Chandra Barik, Authorized signatory, Jr. Executive Worker,

Emp. Code- 3585, At- Sahara India Corporation Office, Bhadrak Branch, Bhadrak

                                                                                         …….OPPOSITE PARTIES

Counsel For Complainant: Complainant him self

Counsel For the OPs        :  Mr. Chinmaya Patra, Adv & Others

Date of hearing:   17.02.2021

Date of order:       22.02.2021

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 44,653/- in as many as 2 numbers of fixed deposit accounts under Golden VM Scheme for a period of 3 years which were matured on 22.02.2019. The total amount deposited by the complainant was Rs 44,653/- as against which the complainant was to receive Rs 68,487/- 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 68,587/- 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. 

                  Although the OP No.1 has submitted written version through advocate but did not participated in the hearing of the case and remained absent on the date fixed for hearing for consecutive 7 dates for which the matter is decided on merit. Other O.Ps neither appeared before the Commission nor submitted any written version for which both the O.Ps are set ex-parte. OP No. 1 in submitting written version has stated that the complainant is not a consumer as he is a member of Humara India Credit Co-operative Society for which he cannot claim as a consumer. Therefore the complaint is not maintainable in present Commission and the Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the case.

On the contrary the complainant argued that although he is a member of the said society he is liable to bear the loss to the extended of the share he has purchased as because his liability is limited. But in this case he does not claim is share whatever he deposited with the said society. As he is a depositor of the said financial institution he is entitled to get back his deposit amount along with the interest as agreed by the O.Ps. The deposit certificates revel that the O.Ps have agreed to pay the maturity value, as mentioned on the certificate, on the date of maturity. Therefore the O.Ps have caused deficiency of service and inordinately delaying to pay the maturity value is nothing but unfair trade practice. Hence the objection raised by the O.Ps is not sustainable and cannot run away from their liabilities.        

                     It is observed from the record and material evidences adduced by the complainant that he has deposited the amount of Rs 44,653/- in as many as 2 fixed deposit accounts as mentioned in the above table. The said accounts have been matured on 22.02.2019 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 inordinate delay in payment of the maturity value of the above mentioned accounts which amounts 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 68,587/- 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 5,000/- 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 of 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 22^nd   February, 2021 under my hand and seal of the Commission.