DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

BATHINDA

C.C. No. 170 of 23-04-2013

Decided on : 19-12-2013

Gurbax Singh, aged 60 years, S.I, Punjab Police S/o Gujjar Singh, R/o House No. 24291, Gali No. D-5, Guru Ki Nagri, Bathinda.

…...Complainant

Versus

1. State Bank of Patiala, Employees Cooperative Urban Salary Earners Thrift and Credit Society Limited, Bathinda, through its President Kimti Lal (Ex. Official of State Bank of Patiala) son of Shri Raunak Ram, House No. 662 backside Dr. Wadi Wali Gali, Purana Hospital, Amrik Singh Road, Bathinda.

2. State Bank of Patiala, Employees Cooperative Urban Salary Earners Thrift and Credit Society Limited, Bathinda, through its Secretary Balwant Rai Sharma (retired Manager, State Bank of Patiala) son of Arjan Ram, resident of Mohalla Jhuti Ka, Purana Thana Road, Bathinda.

3. A.R, Cooperative Societies, Bathinda.

4. State Bank of Patiala, Employees Cooperative Urban Salary Earners Thrift and Credit Society Limited, Bathinda through its liquidator Balwinder Singh, Inspector, office of A.R. Coop CASS Bathinda.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President

Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member

For the Complainant : Sh. Ashok Bharti, counsel for the complainant.

For the opposite parties : Sh. R.B.S Sidhu, counsel for opposite party Nos. 1 & 2.

Sh. Harraj Singh, counsel for opposite party Nos. 3 & 4.

O R D E R

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT

1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that the opposite parties have formed a society named as State Bank of Patiala, Employees Cooperative Urban Salary Earners Thrift and Credit Society Limited, Bathinda and he had deposited a sum of Rs. 13,443/- vide FDR Sr. No. 1575 dated 4-6-1991 and Rs. 11503/- as on dated 4-6-1992, vide FDR Sr. No. 1590 dated 13-9-1993 and Rs. 12,768/- as on dated 12-6-94 vide FDR Sr. No. 1596 dated 24-3-95. The complainant alleged that the aforesaid FDRs have already matured and the same were payable on the maturity date, but the opposite parties have not paid the same inspite of his repeated requests. The complainant even got issued the legal notice dated 18-3-2013 to meet his claim, but to no effect, rather the opposite parties refused to accede to the request of the complainant. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to pay him the amount of above said FDRs with up-to-date interest thereon, alongwith compensation and cost.

2. The opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 filed their joint written statement and pleaded that an Administrator was appointed with the order of the Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies, Bathinda i.e. opposite party No. 3 on 22-10-2008 and whole of the responsibility is of Liquidator and not of opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 as they are no more in control of the society since 2008. Moreover, the complainant has deposited only some amount at one time and not in the shape of three FDRs as alleged by him and as such, the opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 have no concern with the same. The opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 have further pleaded that the complainant has got no right to make any request to opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 and if there is any request of the complainant to them, the same is immaterial and illegal as the opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 are not having any control since 2008.

3. The opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 in their joint written statement took legal objection that State Bank of Patiala, Employees Co-operative Urban Salary Earners Thrift and Credit Society Ltd,., Bathinda, is no more in existence rather the same has already been wound up and as such this Forum has no jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint as per the provisions of section 82(2) of The Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 and this complaint is hopelessly time barred as the society was wound up on 22-10-2008 and this fact is well within the knowledge of the complainant but the complainant kept mum for a period of more than four years and has filed the present complaint at this belated stage. On merits, the opposite party No. 3 & 4 have pleaded that they did not form any such society under the name of State Bank of Patiala Employees Cooperative Urban Salary Earners Thrift and Credit Society Ltd., rather the said society was formed by the Employees of the State Bank of Patiala and was got registered with the Registrar of Societies, Punjab, Chandigarh and the said society has already wound up as the members of the said society were not showing any interest in the managing of the works of the society nor the works of the society were being performed in accordance with the rules and regulations. The opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 further pleaded that the said society was wound up in October, 2008 and the complainant never approached the opposite party No. 4 for the payment of the alleged FDRs by surrendering the original FDRs to the opposite party No. 4 although the complainant being member of the society was fully aware about the proceedings of liquidation and wounding up the said society and at this stage, the complainant is not entitled to recover any alleged amount. The opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 further pleaded that the complainant during the last more than four years never approached the opposite party No. 4 for the payment of the alleged FDRs and has directly filed the present complaint on the basis of false facts.

4. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

5. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

6. The learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs. 13,443/- vide FDR/Sr. No. 1575 dated 4-6-1991, Rs. 11,503/- on 4-6-92 vide FDR No. 1590 dated 13-9-93 and Rs. 12,768/- on 12-6-94 vide FDR No. 1596 with the Society i.e. opposite party No. 4, which has now come under liquidation which is under the supervision of the A.R. Co-operative Society and they are liable to make the payment of FDRs alongwith compensation and cost.

7. On the other hand, the submission of learned counsel for opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 is that the Administrator was appointed with the order of the Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies, Bathinda, i.e. opposite party No. 3 on 22-10-2008 and whole of the responsibility is of liquidator and not of opposite party No. 1 & 2 as they are no more in control of the society since 2008. Moreover, the complainant has deposited only some amount at one time and not in the shape of three FDRs.

8. The learned counsel for opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 submitted that as per the provision of Section 82(2) of The Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, which provides that while a co-operative society is being wound up, no suit or other legal proceedings relation to the business of such society shall be proceeded with or instituted against, the liquidator as such or against the society or any member thereof, except by leave of the Registrar and subject to such terms as he may impose but in this case, the complainant has not obtained any leave of the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Punjab, Chandigarh, before filing the present complaint. The complaint is hopelessly time barred as the society was wound up on 22-10-2008 and the complainant has filed this complaint at belated stage after a period of four years. The learned counsel for opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 further submitted that the society in question was wound up in October, 2008 and the complainant never approached the opposite party No. 4 for the payment of the alleged FDRs by surrendering the original FDRs whereas the complainant being the member of the society was fully aware about the proceedings of liquidation and wounding up the society.

9. Admittedly in the case in hand, the society i.e. opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 formed by the Employees of the State Bank of Patiala registered with Registrar of Societies, Punjab, Chandigarh, has been wound up vide order dated 22-10-2008 of the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ex. OP-4/8 and Sh. Balwinder Singh, Inspector, i.e. opposite party No. 4 was appointed as Liquidator and ordered to take charge of the said society. Thereafter vide order dated 4-10-2013 Ex. OP-4/2 Sh. Gurmail Singh, Inspector, Co-operative Societies was appointed as Liquidator of the society in question.

10. Section 59 of The Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 is regarding the powers of Liquidator, the relevant portion of which is reproduced here under :-

    “Section 59

    59. (1) Powers of Liquidator -(1) Subject to any rules made in this behalf, the whole of the assets of a co-operative society, in respect of which an order for winding up has been made, shall vest in the liquidator appointed under Section 58 from the date of which the order takes effect and the liquidator shall have power to realize such assets by sale or otherwise.

    (2) Such liquidator shall also have power, subject to the control of the Registrar :-

    (i) to make any compromise or arrangement with creditors or persons claiming to be creditors or having or alleging to have any claim, present or future, whereby the society may be rendered liable.”

11. Thus, in view of the aforesaid section of 'The Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, the liquidator is responsible to pay all claims of the society.

    A perusal of letter dated 29-10-2013 Ex. OP-4/7 written by Balwinder Singh, Inspector, Co-operative Societies (Liquidator) to the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bathinda, reveals that till October, 2013 complete record of the society has not been handed over to the liquidator. In such circumstances, opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 are fully responsible to handover the complete record of the society to opposite party No. 4 to enable him to pay the due claims of the claimants as per record.

12. The complainant has claimed the amount of three FDRs Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-3 bearing Nos. 1590 due on 4-6-94 for Rs. 11,503/-, 1575 due on 4-6-92 for Rs. 13,443/- and 1596 due on 4-6-95 for Rs. 12,768/-. The complainant was directed by this Forum to produce before this Forum the said FDRs in original. The complainant on 23-10-2013 produced before this Forum two FDRs in original bearing No. 1590 and 1596 and suffered a statement that original FDR No. 1575 has been given to opposite party No. 1 for clearance. The complainant has not placed on file any document to prove that the said FDR in original has actually be delivered to opposite party No. 1. Thus, this Forum is of the considered opinion that at this stage, the complainant is entitled to the refund of the two FDRs alongwith interest, as detailed above, which he has produced before this Forum. However, the opposite parties will pay the amount of third FDR also if the same was found in the record of opposite party nos. 1 & 2.

13. The opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 has taken legal objections that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and try this complaint and in this regard, the learned counsel for the opposite parties referred Section 82 of 'The Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961'. A perusal of aforesaid section reveals that as per this section there is bar of jurisdiction of courts while the society is being wound up whereas in the case in hand, the society in question was wound up on 22-10-2008. The other legal objection of the opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 is that the complaint is time barred is also not tenable as admittedly the amount of the FDRs is yet to be paid to the complainant. The support can be sought from the observations of the Hon'ble National Commission, New Delhi, in the case titled Anil Pahwa Vs. Baldip Singh & Ors 2012(1) CLT 199 wherein it has been held :-

    ..(ii) Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 24-A – Limitation – Continuing cause of action -Deposits – FDR – Co-operative Society – Since the complainants have not received their deposits until date it would amount to continuing cause of action – Objection as to limitation repelled.

    (iii) Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 3 – Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 – Additional remedy – Bar of Jurisdiction – Deposits – FDR – Cooperative Society – Non refund of deposits – Held that irrespective of the provision under the Cooperative Societies Act the Consumer Fora would have jurisdiction to entertain complaints, particularly in view of Section 3 of the CP Act, 1986”

14. In view of what has been discussed above, this complaint is accepted with Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and cost against opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 and without any compensation against opposite party Nos. 1 & 2. The opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 are directed to furnish the complete record pertaining to the FDRs of the complainant to opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 are directed to pay Rs. 11503/- the amount of FDR No. 1590 and Rs. 12,768/- the amount of FDR No. 1596 with interest @ 9% P.A. from the date of their deposit till realization within next 15 days. The opposite party Nos. 3 & 4 are further directed to pay the amount of Rs. 13,443/- of FDR No. 1575 with interest @ 9% P.A. from the date of deposit till realization to the complainant within the period prescribed above, if the record of the same was found and furnished by opposite party Nos. 1 & 2.

15. In case of non-furnishing the record by the opposite party nos. 1 & 2 to opposite party Nos. 3 & 4, the compliance of this order will be made by all the four opposite parties jointly and severally within next 15 days and complainant would be entitled to the amount of all three FDRs mentioned above.

16. The complete compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

    A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to record.

    Pronounced in open Forum

    19-12-2013

    (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

    President

     

     

     

     

    (Sukhwinder Kaur)

    Member