West Bengal

Dakshin Dinajpur

CC/44/2021

Sri Biswajit Das, S/O- Beni Madhab Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Debashis Barman

29 Jul 2022

ORDER

   The brief fact of the complaint case is that the complainant is an investor of Sahara India Pariwar under Hili F.C. Branch, District of Dakshin Dinajpur. The complainant invest a total amount of Rs .10,000/- in a FD in SAHARA E.SHINE Scheme on 11.11.2011 for a period of 96 months of maturity and also invested Rs.50,000/-+ Rs.50,000/- in two separate FD in SAHARA Q SHOP PLAN-H scheme on 11.10.2012 & 19.10.2012 for a period of 72 months of maturity. After the date of maturity of the above said investments the complainant went to the office of the O.P. several times for getting his maturity amount of the aforesaid investments. But in every occasion the O.P. took a new plea. Till today the O.P. did not pay the maturity amount to the complainant. Lastly the complainant submits his prayer for demand claim before the Assistant Director, Consumer Affairs & FBP, Balurghat, Dakshin Dianjpur on 29.07.2021, but all the efforts in vain. Finding no other alternatives the complainant files this instant case against the O.P. under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 claiming the maturity amount of Rs.22,460/- as per SAHARA E SHINE Scheme and Rs.50,000/- + Rs.50,000/- along with maturity benefits & interest as per SAHARA Q SHOP PLAN-H Scheme,  compensation of Rs. 50,000/-  for delay and for mental pain and agony and litigation cost of Rs. 20,000/-.   

   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 and immovable properties due to which the payment has remained stopped and the O.P. craves 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 three Certificates by firisti: -

Sl No.	Certificate No.	Date	Invested  Amount	Maturity value
1.	351001064864	11.11.2011	Rs.10,000/-	Rs.22,640/-
2	562000551298	11.10.2012	Rs.50,000/-	Rs.1,06,635/-
3	562008515927	19.10.2012	Rs.50,000/-	Rs.1,06,635/-

 

       Copy of application before the Assistant Director, Consumner Affairs & FBP Balurghat, Dakshin Dinajpur dated 29.07.2021.

 

 O.P. had also submitted examination in chief 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 (Rs. 10,000/- + Rs.50,000/- + Rs.50,000/-) = Rs.1,10,000/- (one lakh ten thousand ) only under  the scheme of  SAHARA E SHINE and SAHARA Q- SHOP PLAN-H of Sahara credit co-operative society Ltd. of the opposite party. So, there is no hesitation to hold that the complainant is a consumer within the meaning under section 35 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   invest a sum of Rs 1,10,000/- under  the scheme of  SAHARA E SHINE and SAHARA Q- SHOP PLAN-H of Sahara credit co-operative society Ltd. of opposite party on 11.11.2011  for a period of 96 months  and 11.10.2012 & 19.10.2012 fo a period of 72 months and against which the opposite party issued three certificates to the complainant this is also admitted facts that the maturity period of 96 months and 72 months was already over on 11.11.2019, 11.10.2018 & 19.10.2028 respectively. This is also not disputed that the complainant has not yet received any single furthering from the O.P. against the aforesaid investments.

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 he is entitled to get maturity amount of Sahara E Shine and Sahara Q shop Plan – H together with interest as per terms and condition of the schemes but the O.P. have violated the terms and conditions and there is no denial of the fact about lack of responsibility in discharging their duties on the part of the O.P. Therefore in our opinion there lies deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Accordingly all the points are decided in favour of the complainant.

 Hence, it is

                                                                                        O R D E R E D

           That the Consumer complaint Case No.44/2021 is allowed on contest in part with cost against the O.P. The Opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.22,640/- (Twenty two thousand six hundred forty ) only as maturity value of the invested amount under the scheme of SAHARA E SHINE Scheme and to pay sum of (Rs.1,06,635/- + Rs.1,06,635/-) Total Rs.2,13,270/- under the Scheme of SAHARA Q- SHOP PLAN-H  with interest @ 8% p.a .from the date of maturity till realization by issuing an account payee cheque in favour of the complainant within 45 days from the date of passing this order respectively. 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.