West Bengal

Dakshin Dinajpur

CC/45/2021

Smt. Samapti Saha, S/O- Dulal Ch. Saha - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Sahara India Pariwar, Hili F.C. Branch - Opp.Party(s)

Debashis Barman

21 Jul 2022

ORDER

The brief fact of the complaint case is that the complainant is an investor of Sahara India Pariwar. The complainant invested the amount of Rs 50,000/- in 10 different policies (5000 each) under the scheme on 14.02.2015 and also invested Rs 21000/- in 3 different polices (Rs 7000/- each) on 24.01.2012 under the scheme of “F6 Sahara. H .Shine for a period of 72 & 96 months respectively against which the O.P. issued thirteen certificates. After the date of maturity of the aforesaid investments the complainant went to the office of the O.P. in several occasions for getting her maturity amount of the aforesaid investments. But the O.P. was adopting a dilatory tactics to disburse the maturity amount of the policies. Lastly the complainant file a complaint before the consumer affairs Dakshin Dinajpur on 29.07.2021 but all the efforts are in vain. Till today the O.P. did not pay the maturity amount to the complainant. The complainant invested the aforesaid amount for the better future and to fulfill his needs at the time of crisis but due to the negligent act of the O.P. the complainant files this instant case against the O.P. u/s 35 of C.P. Act 2019 claiming the maturity amount of Rs 158952/- along with interest  and benefits as per the terms and conditions laid down in the scheme of “ F6 Sahara .H. Shine” and compensation of Rs. 70,000/- for mental pain and agony, Rs 25,000/-as litigation cost.

Notice was issued upon the O.P. and the O.P. entered appearance and contested the case by filing a written version wherein the material averments made in the complaint are denied and it has been contended inter alia that the instant case is not maintainable. It has been submitted

 

by the O.P. that due to some litigation pending with SEBI and the Apex Court regarding the financial transaction of the O.P. group imposed embargo on the movable immovable properties due to which the payment has remained stopped and the O.P. crave leave of this Commission and prays for dismissal of the instant case.  

          In this case complainant has submitted examination in chief supported by affidavit together with original copy of following thirteen Certificates by firisti: -

Sl No	Certificate No.	Date	Amount	Maturity date
1.	914000086639	14.02.2015	Rs.5,000/-	14.02.2021
2.	914000086640	14.02.2015	Rs5,000/-	14.02.2021
3.	914000086641	14.02.2015	Rs 5000/-	14.02.2021
4.	914000086642	14.02.2015	Rs 5000/-	14.02.2021
5.	914000086643	14.02.2015	Rs5000/-	14.02.2021
6.	914000086644	14.02.2015	Rs5000/-	14.02.2021
7.	914000086645	14.02.2015	Rs5000/-	14.02.2021
8.	914000086646	14.02.2015	Rs5000/-	14.02.2021
9.	914000086647	14.02.2015	Rs5000/-	14.02.2021
10.	914000086648	14.02.2015	Rs5000/-	14.02.2021
11.	351002051078	24.01.2012	Rs7000/-	24.01.2020
12.	351002051079	24.01.2012	Rs7000/-	24.01.2020
13.	351002051080	24.01.2012	Rs 7000/-	24.01.2020

 

2. one application before the consumer affairs office dated 29.07 2021.

         

 O.P. had also submitted examination in chief of OPW-1 Joy Dutta Gupta by way of affidavit but no document is submitted on the side of the O.P.    

                    Points for discussion

 

1. Is the complainant a consumer to the opposite party?
2. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
3. Is the complainant entitled to get any relief/reliefs as prayed for?

                        DECISION  WITH  REASONS

 

Point No.1 This is admitted fact that complainant invested a total sum of  Rs71,000/- (Seventy one thousand only) under  the scheme of F6 Sahara. H. Shine of the opposite party. So, there is no hesitation to hold that the complainant is a consumer within the meaning under section 2   of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

 

 Point No.2 & 3 These two issues are taken up together for discussion for the sake of convenience and brevity. This is admitted position that the complainant had invested Rs. 71,000/- (Seventy thousand only) under F6 Sahara .H. Shine Scheme of Sahara Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd. of the opposite party on 14.02.2015 & 24.01. 2012 for a period of 72 & 96 months respectively against which the opposite party duly issued 13 certificates to the complainant. This is also admitted fact that the maturity period of 72& 96 months was already over on 14.02.2021 &24.01.2020 respectively. This is also not disputed that the complainant has not yet received any single furthering from the O.P. against the aforesaid investment.

 

We have looked into the complaint, the written version of the O.P. and evidence filed by the parties minutely. All these reveal that the complainant is a bona-fide consumer of the O.P. and she is entitled to get maturity amount of Rs.158952/- (one lakh fifty eight thousand nine hundred fifty two only) together with interest as per terms and condition of the above mentioned scheme but the O.P. has violated the terms and conditions and there is no denial of the fact about lack of responsibility in discharging his duty on the party of the O.P. and their lies deficiency in service on the party of the O.P.

 Hence, it is

                                                                                   O R D E R E D

           That the Consumer complaint Case No.45/2021 is allowed on contest in part with cost against the O.P. The Opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs 158,952/-(one lakh fifty eight thousand nine hundred fifty two only) as maturity value of the invested amount together with interest @ 8% p.a .from the date of maturity, i,e, (14.02.2021& 24.01.2020) till realization by issuing an account payee cheque in favour of the complainant within 45 days from the date of passing this order. The O.P. is further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- towards litigation cost in default complainant has liberty to execute the order as per law. 

 

          Let a plain copy of this order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost.