View 33587 Cases Against Society
Priyanath Panda filed a consumer case on 04 Jul 2023 against The Sector Manager/Asst. Manager worker,Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., in the Cuttak Consumer Court. The case no is CC/146/2022 and the judgment uploaded on 17 Jul 2023.
IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.
C.C.No.146/2022
Priyanath Panda,
S/O: Shri Giridhari Panda,
At/PO:Bidyadharpur,P.S:Chauliaganj,
Cuttack Town,(Cuttack Sadar),
Dist:Cuttack-753004(Odisha). ... Complainant.
Vrs.
1. The Sector Manager/Asst. Manager worker,
Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,
Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,
And Saharayan Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd.,
(Sahara India),Choudhury Bazar Sector 1352,
P.O:Buxibazar,P.S:Cantonment Road,
Dist:Cuttack,Pin-753001.
2. The Regional Manager,Worker.
Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,
Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,
And Saharayan Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd.,
(Sahara India) Territorial Office,Plot No.50,
Sahidnagar,P.O/P.S:Sahidnagar,
Bhubaneswar,Dist:Khurda,Pin-751007.
3. The Zonal Manager Worker,
Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,
Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,
And Saharayan Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd.,
(Sahara India),Plot No.50,
Sahidnagar,P.O/P.S:Sahidnagar,
Bhubaneswar,Dist:Khurda,Pin-751007.
4. The Authorized Person,
Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,
(Sahara India) Regd. Office,Sahara India Bhawan,
1 KapoorthalaComplex,Aliganj,
Lucknow,226420,Uttar Pradesh.
5. The Authorized Person,
Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.,
(Sahara India), Regd. Office: Mangal Jyoti,
101,227/2 AJC Bose Road,Kolkata,
West Bengal-700020.
6. The Authorized Person,
Saharayan Universal Multipurpose Society Ltd.,
(Sahara India), Regd. Office 195, Zone-1, Infront of D.B.Mall,
M.P.Nagar,Bhopal,Madhypradesh-462011.
7. Managing Worker and Chairman of Sahara India Paribar,
Sahara IndiaBhawan,1 Kapoorthala Complex,
Aliganj,Lucknow-226024,Uttar Pradesh. ... Opp. Parties.
Present: Sri Debasish Nayak,President.
Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.
Date of filing: 15.07.2022
Date of Order: 04.07.2023
For the complainant: Mr. M.K.Pati,Adv. & Associates.
For the O.Ps. :None.
Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.
The case of the complainant in short is that he had invested money by purchasing sixteen nos. of Fixed Deposit Certificates of different schemes of the O.Ps. The certificates bearing A/c. No.13527204340, No.13527204341, No.13527204342,No.13527204343& No.13527204345 were purchased by the complainant on payment of Rs.18,000/- for each of the certificate on 14.8.2018 under “Sahara A. Select” scheme which were to be matured on 14.2.2020 and the maturity value was as mentioned against each of the certificate. The complainant has stated that the certificates bearing A/c No.13526414528, No.13526414591, No.13526419958, No.13526900193, No. 13526900192, No. 13526900191 & No. 13526408565 were obtained by him from the O.Ps under “Golden A Double” scheme on payment of Rs.4,700/-, Rs.6,100/-,Rs.11,000/-,Rs.5,015/-, Rs.25,697/-, Rs.8,065/- & Rs.10,200/- respectively which were to be matured after sixty-four months and the matured value was mentioned against each of the certificate. The complainant alleged to have obtained the certificates from the O.Ps bearing A/c No. 13527308879,No. 13527308878,No. 13527307735 & No. 13526800336 under “Super BB” scheme on payment of Rs.18,585/-, Rs.12,200/-, Rs.5,8866/- & Rs.25,250/- respectively which were to be matured after thirty-six months and the matured value as mentioned against each of the certificate. The complainant also had alleged to have opened the three different Accounts such as A/c.No. 13523708785 on monthly payment of Rs.300/- on 19.12.2011, A/c No.13526904258 on monthly payment of Rs.1100/- on 31.12.2016 and A/c bearing No.13521402636 on monthly payment of Rs.50/- on 27.12.2016 in three different monthly schemes of the O.Ps and deposited Rs.24,600/-, Rs.38,500/- and Rs.2600/- respectively on different dates. The maturity amount of the said Accounts were Rs.41,800/- Rs.52,397 and Rs.2760/- respectively.It is stated by the complainant that he had invested total amount of Rs.2,86,398/- by purchasing different Fixed Deposit certificates as well as by paying the dues of the three monthly schemes with the O.Ps and as per the scheme he is entitled to get the maturity value of Rs.4,37,404/- plus extra benefit Rs.3000/-, thus in total Rs.4,40,404/-. The complainant has filed the calculation sheet by annexing it as Annexure-2 in his complaint petition wherein the details of the scheme, deposited amount as well as the maturity has been calculated. It is stated by the complainant that after the maturity date, he in order to get his matured amount from the O.Ps had visited the office of the O.Ps on many occasions but the O.Ps did not release his maturity amount. Hence, the complainant has filed the present case with a prayer for a direction to the O.Ps to pay his maturity amount in the certificates calculated as Rs.4,40,404/- alongwith future interest @ 18% per annum as well as compensation of Rs.35,000/- towards mental agony and harassment alongwith a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards his litigation expenses.
The complainant has filed some documents in order to prove his case as well as evidence on affidavit, further evidence on affidavit by clarifying the calculation of maturity amount in support of his case.
2. The O.Ps did not appear. Hence, they were set exparte.
3. The points for determination in this case are as follows:
i. Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?
ii. Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and if they had practised any unfair trade?
iii. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?
Point no.i.
The O.Ps are Co-operative Societies constituted under Multistate Co-operative Society Act,2002 and the complainant is a member of the O.Ps. Hence, the question arose whether any dispute between the complainant and the O.Ps is maintainable before this Commission as there is provision in the said Multi State Co-operative Society Act,2002 for redressal of grievances of the complainant against the O.Ps. In this regard the learned counsel for the complainant relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court relating to maintainability of his case reported in AIR 2004(SC) 448, in the case of the Secretary, Thirumurugan Cooperative Agricultural Credit Society Vrs. M.Lalitha (dead) through LRs and others, wherein The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that even if there is arbitration clause in the Cooperative Societies Act, Consumer Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint case as there is no provision in the said Co-operative Society Act ousting the jurisdiction of Consumer Commission. He also relied upon another decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 2021 SC,70 in the case of Imperia Structures Ltd. Vrs. Anil Patni and others, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that RERA Act does not debar for adjudication of dispute by the Consumer Commission for redressal of grievances of the complainant relating to the Real Estate matter. Hence the Consumer Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the dispute relating to the Real Estate matter. The learned counsel of the complainant also relied upon another decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in (2022)6 SCC,496 in the case of Voda Phone, Idea Cellular Ltd. Vrs. Ajay Kumar Agarwal, wherein it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that even if there is provision U/S-7B of the Indian Telegraph Act,1885, the aggrieved person can approach the Consumer Commission as the jurisdiction of the Consumer Commission is not ousted U/S-7B of the Indian Telegraph Act.
At this juncture, it is relevant to go through the Sec-100 of the C.P.Act,2019. In Sec-100 of the C.P.Act,2019 in clear and unambiguous terms it is stated that the provisions of the Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other Law for the time being in force.
In view of the Sec-100 of the C.P.Act,2019 as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is held that the case of the complainant is maintainable before this Commission.
Point No.ii.
The averments as made by the complainant in his complaint petition gains ample corroboration from the documentary evidence filed by him.
Admittedly, the complainant had purchased sixteen nos. of Fixed Deposit Certificates as well as he had deposited money in three nos. of monthly scheme of the O.Ps.In total he had paid Rs.2,88,398/- to the O.Ps as mentioned against each of the sixteen nos. of certificates as well as three nos. of the ledger statement issued in case of three nos. of monthly schemes. The contention of the complainant is supported with xerox copy of Fixed Deposit certificates as well as xerox copy of pass books and ledger statement in case of monthly schemes as filed by him.
It is not disputed that the complainant had purchased sixteen nos. of Fixed Deposit Certificates from the O.Psas well as had deposited money in three nos. of different monthly scheme of the O.Ps. The maturity date of the said certificates/bonds as well as of the monthly schemes were clearly mentioned in the said certificates as well as in the pass books in case of the monthly scheme, which were due on the dates as mentioned against each of the certificates and pass books in case of the monthly schemes. The O.Ps had not given the complainant the matured amount after the maturity period. The complainant had approached the O.Ps many times to get his maturity amount but they did not give the matured amount, which amounts to deficiency of service by the O.Ps. In this context, learned counsel for the complainant has relied upon a decision of Hon’ble National Commission reported in 2001(3) CPR, 194(NC) in the case of Smt. Kalawati & others vrs. M/s. United Vaish Co-operative Thirft & Credit Society Ltd., where in the Hon’ble National Commission has held that non-refund of fixed deposit after maturity comes under the deficiency in service. This decision is applicable in the present case. The complainant had invested money with the O.Ps for earning interest. The complainant would have earned interest if he would have invested his money in any other private sector or public sector undertaking. But in the present case the O.Ps did not give the matured amount by which the complainant was deprived of getting his principal amount as well as interest component. Hence, the O.Ps have committed deficiency in service as well as had adopted unfair trade practice by not releasing the complainant’s matured amount after its maturity period. This issue is answered in favour of the complainant.
Point no. iii.
From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is definitely maintainable and the complainant is entitled to get the maturity amountof his sixteen nos. of Fixed Deposit certificates as well as of three nos. of monthly schemes as mentioned above. The complainant has filed the detailed calculation sheet of the maturity amount and has filed the same by marking as Annexure-2 in his complaint petition. He has filed further evidence on affidavit by clarifying the calculations as made in Annexure-2. The calculations as made by the complainant is not controverted. Hence the calculations as made in the Annexure-2 is deemed to be a genuine one as per the scheme of the O.Ps. In view of the discussions made above, as well as of the calculations made in Annexure-2, the complainant is entitled to get the total maturity amount of Rs.4,37,404/- besides the interest component. But, the complainant is not entitled to get Rs.3000/- towards the bonus being not substantiated with any means towards the maturity amount of the Fixed Deposit Certificate bearing A/c no.13526419958 of “Golden A Double” scheme. Hence, it is so ordered;
ORDER
The case is allowed exparte against the O.Ps. The O.Ps are found to be jointly and severally liable here in this case. Thus, the O.Ps are directed to pay the complainant the total matured amount of Rs.4,37,404/- of thesixteen nos. of Fixed Deposit certificates as well as of three nos. of monthly schemes alongwith interest thereon @ 12% per annum from their respective date of maturity till the final payment is made. The O.Ps are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.35,000/- towards the compensation for mental agony and harassment as well as a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards the litigation expenses to the complainant. This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Order pronounced in the open court on the 4th day of July,2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.
Sri Sibananda Mohanty
Member.
Sri Debasish Nayak
President.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.