For Complainant          :             Self.

For OP No.1                    :             Sri S. K. Mohanty, Advocate.

For OP No.2 & 3            :             None.

                                                                        -x-

1.                         The brief history of the case of the complainant is that he had opened 10 A/cs. with the Ops, under Sahara Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd. and Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. scheme as detailed below:-

Scheme Name                      Amount             Cert./Acct. No./date          Date of maturity

1. Sahara Universal             Rs.16, 000/-              304003989187/24225700176 Dt.06.01.18

M.S. Ltd.

2. –do-                                   Rs.16, 000/-              304003989188/24225700177 Dt.06.01.18
3. –do-                                   Rs.16, 000/-              304003989189/24225700178 Dt.06.01.18
4. –do-                                   Rs.16, 000/-              304003989190/24225700179 Dt.06.01.18
5. –do-                                   Rs.16, 000/-              304003989191/24225700180 Dt.06.01.18
6. –do-                                   Rs.16, 000/-              304003989192/24225700181 Dt.06.01.18
7. Sahara India                     Rs.13, 000/-              478002554484/24222505964 Dt.13.12.18

Real Estate Corp. Ltd.

8.  –do-                                  Rs.13, 000/-              478002554485/24222505965 Dt.13.12.18
9. –do-                                   Rs.12, 000/-              478002554486/24222505966 Dt.13.12.18
10. –do-                                   Rs.12, 000/-              478002554487/24222505967 Dt.13.12.18

It is submitted that the complainant being in need of money for his daughter’s marriage, approached the OP.1 to close his above accounts and pay the proceeds thereof.  The complainant also demanded his claims by depositing necessary papers with the Ops but the OP.1 insisted the complainant to reinvest at least 50% of the proceeds.  As the complainant did not agree, the Ops did not pay any heed to the requests of the complainant.  It is submitted that instead of repeated approach and demands, the Ops are stick up to their stand for which he is suffering mental agony.  Thus alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Ops, he filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops to refund Rs.96, 000/- deposited under Sahara Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd. and Rs.50, 000/- deposited under Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. as stated supra with interest as per scheme and to pay Rs.60, 000/- towards compensation and cost to the complainant.

2.                         The Ops in spite of valid notice and repeated adjournment did not file counter but Sri S. K. Mohanty, Advocate appeared on behalf of OP.1 through proper Vakalatnama.

3.                         The complainant has filed certain documents in support of his case. Heard from the OP.1 through its A/R and perused the materials available on record.

4.                         In this case, it is an admitted fact that the complainant has availed Sahara schemes from the Ops on 13.10.2008 and 06.01.2015 under ten accounts and has deposited the amounts as stated above.  The complainant has filed copy of receipts. His case is that he approached Ops to receive proceeds after closure of above accounts but the Ops are not paying any heed to the requests of the complainant with different pleas.

5.                         We have heard from the A/R for the OP No.1 in absence of counter.  However, the allegations of the complainant remained unchallenged in view of documents available on record.

6.                         While coming to the merit of this case, it is seen that the complainant has deposited his money under the schemes as detailed supra.  When the complainant needs his money after maturity etc., the Ops have no right to retain the money involved in it.  On approach of the complainant, it is obligatory on the part of the Ops to release the benefits forthwith but in this case due to non release of maturity value the complainant has approached this Forum.  The Op.1 through his A/R has come up with untenable plea that the complainant has never approached them with necessary papers for release of his money.  Hence non release of amount in favour of the complainant after due demand, in our opinion certainly amounts to unfair trade practice on the part of the Ops.  Due to non receipt of deposited amount with benefits, the complainant must have suffered some mental agony but in the peculiar circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to grant any compensation in favour of the complainant except a sum of Rs.2000/- towards cost of this litigation.  Further in this case, the OP.1 has received the amount and issued deposit receipts.  Hence the said OP.1 is liable to pay the deposited amount to the complainant with due interest as per scheme till date of payment.  The OP No.3 being the head of the Sahara Group is also jointly liable for payment of maturity amount to the complainant.

7.                         Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the Ops.1 & 3 being jointly and severally liable are directed to refund Rs.96, 000/- deposited under Sahara Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd. (6 certificates @ Rs.16, 000/- each) and Rs.50, 000/- under Sahara India Real Estate Corp Ltd. ( 4 certificates) with as usual rate of interest and benefits under the schemes from the date of deposits till actual payment and to pay Rs.2000/- towards cost to the complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.  If the Ops fail to make payment within the given period, they are to pay Rs.100/- towards compensation per day to the complainant from the date of this order over and above the guaranteed interest under the scheme.

(to dict.)