DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, PUNJAB.

Complaint Case No : RBT/CC/320/2020

Date of Institution   : 26.10.2020

Date of Decision    : 08.03.2021

 

Jaswant Rai son of Sh. Sham Lal resident of H.No. B-XI-726, Gali No. 6, K.C. Road, Barnala, District Barnala.     

                   …Complainant Versus

1. M/s Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Sahara India Parivar, Branch Office, College Road, Under Bridge, Near S.D. College, Barnala through its Branch Manager.

2. M/s Sahara India Parivar, Opposite Polo Ground, Near Sethi Sales Corporation, Lower Mall, Near Modi College, Patiala through its Sector Manager cum Branch Manager.

3. M/s Sahara India Parivar, Regional Office, SCO-1110-1111, Sector-22B, Chandigarh through its Regional Manager. 

4. M/s Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Sahara India Parivar, Regd. Office -Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Lukhnow-226024, Uttar Pradesh through its Managing Director.

5. M/s Sahara India Parivar, Command Office: Sahara India Bhawan, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, Lukhnow-226024, Uttar Pradesh, through its Chairman Cum Managing Director Survot Rai Sahara. 

6. Santosh Jindal wife of Yograj resident of St. No. 11, Backside Saravhitkari School, Grain Market Road, Barnala.               

                       …Opposite Parties

Complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Present: Sh. R.K. Singla counsel for complainant.

Sh. N.K. Garg counsel for opposite parties No. 1 to 5.

Sh. Sumant Goyal counsel for opposite party No. 6.

 

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Kuljit Singh : President

2.Sh. Tejinder Singh Bhangu : Member

 

(ORDER BY TEJINDER SINGH BHANGU, MEMBER):

1. The present file has been received from the Hon'ble State Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh, as remanded case vide its order dated 28.9.2020 with a direction to the District Commission to hear the complaint and decide the same afresh on merits, in accordance with law. 

2. Initially the complainant has filed the present complaint on 1.7.2019 against the opposite parties which was dismissed by the District Forum (Now Commission) vide its order dated 18.11.2019 being not maintainable on the point that there is no 'consumer dispute' between the complainant and opposite parties. Against this order of District Forum (Now Commission) the opposite parties have preferred a First Appeal No. 841 of 2019 before the Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh, on 20.12.2019 and the same was decided by the Hon'ble State Commission, Punjab vide its order dated 28.9.2020 and the relevant Para No. 21 of the order is as under:-

“In view of our above discussion, it is held that the complainant(s) falls under the definition of consumer and the District Commission has the jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the complaint on merits being the additional remedy available under the Consumer Protection Act. Therefore, all the above mentioned appeals are allowed, the impugned orders of the District Commission, are set aside and the cases are remanded to the District Commission, Barnala, with a direction to the District Commission to hear the complaint and decide the same afresh on merits, in accordance with  law”

3. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant Jaswant Rai has filed the present complaint under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (amended upto date) against M/s Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., and others (hereinafter referred as opposite parties) on the ground that the opposite parties are a registered limited company under Multistate Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 and engaged in the business of accepting deposits from investors and the opposite party No. 1 is branch office of opposite parties and opposite party No. 6 is the authorized agent of opposite parties. It is further averred that the opposite party No. 1 & 6 advised the complainant to invest in the contributed scheme of the opposite parties for the purpose of getting maximum interest. On trusting the words of opposite parties No. 1 & 6 the complainant depositing Rs. 300/- for 60 months and collection of each installment was done by the opposite party No. 6 at Barnala. In this regard an Account No. 73403700374 on dated 23.11.2011 was alloted by the opposite parties. The opposite party No. 6 collected the installments No. 59 & 60 from the complainant but the entry was not done in the passbook by the opposite parties. It is further alleged that after the expiry of 60 months the complainant handed over the original passbook to the opposite parties and asked for the refund of his money as per clause No. 5 (ii). Thereafter, the complainant approached the opposite parties to get the maturity amount. But the opposite parties avoided the complainant on one pretext or the other and ultimately after few days they flatly refused to pay back maturity amount of the complainant. Thus, there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. Hence, the present complaint is filed for seeking the following reliefs.- 

1) To pay a sum of Rs. 18,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of payment till its realization. 

2) To pay Rs. 1,00,000/-  as compensation and Rs. 11,000/- as litigation expenses.   

4. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite parties No. 1 to 5 appeared and filed joint written version taking preliminary objections interalia on the grounds that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and the complaint is misconceived, baseless and unsustainable in the eyes of law. It is further averred that the complainant is not a 'consumer' of opposite parties. Further, the opposite party is a Society duly registered under “Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002” and the complainant is member of the Society. As such, for any dispute between Society and Member, consumer complaint is not maintainable. On merits, it is submitted that the complainant contacted the office of Society to become a member for participating in the scheme for taking/gaining benefit of Society. The complainant after understanding the terms and conditions, bylaws and objects of the society has become a member and shared the amount of Rs. 17,400/- in 58 monthly installments each of Rs. 300/- w.e.f. 23.11.2011 vide membership No. 73401100558 at Barnala office of the Society. It is further submitted that the complainant has concocted a story and has filed the present complaint claiming payment which is against the terms and conditions of the agreement. Moreover, the complainant has no right to claim against the terms of the agreement. It is further submitted that due to economic crisis and financial constraint the answering opposite parties was rendered unable to make the payment of contribution amount and its benefit at one go. As such, the complainant was asked to receive the payment in part/installment, but she willfully refused to receive the same in part. So, due to this reason the above said payment could not have been made. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on their part and prayed for the dismissal of complaint. 

5. The opposite party No. 6 filed separate written version taking preliminary objections on the grounds of maintainability, complaint is purely of civil nature, complaint is time barred and the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands etc. On merits, the opposite party No. 6 denied the case of the complainant. It is submitted that after collecting the installments from the complainant, the opposite party No. 6 got deposited the same with the office of opposite party No. 1. It is further denied that the entry No. 59 & 60 were collected from the complainant. All other allegations of the complainant are denied and prayed for the dismissal of complaint. 

6. In support of his case the complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of passbook Ex.C-2. Ld. Counsel for complainant on 5.11.2019 has made statement that he does not want to file any rejoinder and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

7. On the other hand, to rebut the case of the complainant the opposite parties No. 1 to 5 have failed to tender any evidence and the evidence of opposite parties is closed by the order of this Commission dated 20.10.2019. 

8. The opposite party No. 6 tendered into evidence copies of receipts Ex.O.P-6/1 & Ex.O.P-6/2 and closed the evidence. 

9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on file. 

10. In order to prove his case the complainant has placed on record his detailed affidavit Ex.C-1, in which he reiterated the averments as mentioned in the complaint. He has further placed on record copy of passbook Ex.C-2 vide which an account number is mentioned as 73403700374 and the account opening date is mentioned as 23.11.2011. Further, the tenure of the scheme is mentioned as 60 months and the mode of installment mentioned as monthly, denomination Rs. 300/. Further, Ex.C-2 shows that the complainant has paid 58 installments of Rs. 300/- to the opposite parties and in total paid Rs. 17,400/-. 

11. On the other hand, the opposite parties No. 1 to 5 have failed to tender any evidence and the evidence of opposite parties is closed by the order of this Commission dated 20.10.2019. 

12. In order to rebut the case of complainant the opposite party No. 6 has placed on record copies of receipts Ex.O.P-6/1 & Ex.O.P-6/2, which are the two receipts of Rs. 300/- each in favour of Jaswant Rai.  

13. From perusal of the record it shows that the complainant has opted the above said scheme of the opposite parties and deposited a total amount of Rs. 17,400/- with the opposite parties in 58 monthly installments. Further, from Ex.C-2 it proved that the above said scheme was for 60 months and on maturity the payment was to be given to the customer/complainant. Further, in the written version the opposite parties No. 1 to 5 have admitted that the complainant has deposited Rs. 300/- in 58 installments in the said scheme and in total the complainant has deposited Rs. 17,400/-. It is important to mention here that to rebut the case of the complainant, the opposite parties No. 1 to 5 have failed to produce any evidence on record.  

14. We have gone through the Passbook Ex.C-2, in which in the Para No. 5 (i) of the terms and conditions it is mentioned that after the tenure of 60 months on the total Principal amount of Rs. 12,000/- the maturity amount of Rs. 15,540/- will be given. So, the complainant has deposited 58 monthly installments and in total Rs. 17,400/- has been deposited by the complainant with the opposite parties and according to the above said method the amount of complainant of Rs. 17,400/- comes to the tune of Rs. 22,533/-.

15. As a result of the above discussion, the present complaint is partly allowed and opposite parties No. 1 to 5 are directed to pay the amount of Rs. 22,533/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of maturity of above said plan i.e. 22.11.2016 till its realization. Compliance of the order be made within the period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance. 

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

       8th Day of March, 2021 

 

 

            (Kuljit Singh)

            President             

 

(Tejinder Singh Bhangu)

Member