JUDGEMENT.
Sri A.K.Patra,President
The crux of the case is that the complainant has filed this complaint alleging deficiency in service against aforementioned Opposite Party for non payment of maturity amount for which the complainant sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.
Upon Notice, the O.Ps. appeared before the Commission and filed their written version interalia denying the petition allegations on all its material particulars. We perused the complaint petition and the document filed by the parties.
From the documents filed by the complainant it reveals that the complainant had deposited total amount of Rs.20,600/- in Sahara Q Shop Scheme of the Opposite Parties vide Certificate No.71024122416, 71024122448, 71024122449,& 71024122460 dt.18.06.2012 (Rs.5150/- each) and the said deposited amount got maturity on 18.06.2018 but the Opposite Party is not paying the amount in spite of several approaches. In support of deposit the Complainant has filed copies of Certificates. After the due of maturity the complainant approached to the Opposite Party several times for payment of maturity amount but the Opposite Party did not listen to the claim of the complainant and refused to make payment.
We relied upon the judgment reported in CCC 2005 page No. 192 (SS) where the Hon’ble State CDR Commission, Maharashtra observed “ Consumer Protection Act,1986- Section 2(1)(O)- service-Co-operative society-service rendered by a Credit Society in accepting deposits from the investors falls within definition of service in Section 2(1)(o) of the C.P.Act,1986.
In the given facts and circumstances of the case we deem that the retention of deposited amount by the Opposite Party for such a long time amounted to deficiency in service as defined U/S Sec.2(11)(g) ‘ Deficiency in Service means “ any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality , nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service”. And includes (i) any action negligence of omission or commission by such person which cause loss or injury to the consumer (ii) deliberate withholding of relevant information by such person to the consumer.
This Commission found the act of withholding payment by the Opposite Party is not genuine. It is arbitrary and oppressive and is gross deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party . Hence the complainant deserves to be compensated. In our view the interest of justice would met if this Commission award accrued interest from the date of maturity till its realization. In view of the above discussion relating to the above case and referring citations we allow the above complaint petition in part.
Hence to meet the ends of justice, the following order is passed.
ORDER
In result the complaint petition is allowed in part against the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party is ordered to pay the deposited amount of Rs.20,600/- which got maturity on 18.06.2028 with up to date interest @ of 12 % per annum till its realization.
Since we award the interest on the amount due which has not been paid by the Opposite Party after the due date, no further compensation is awarded inter alia to pay Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.
The Opposite Party is ordered to make compliance the aforesaid Order within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order .
The pending application if any is also stands disposed off.
Pronounced in open Commission today on this 3rd day of December 2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.
The judgment be uploaded forthwith in the website of the Commission and free copy of this order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download the same from the Confonet to treat the same as copy of the order received from this Commission
Dictated and corrected by me.
Dictated and corrected by me.
President
I agree.
Member President
