West Bengal

Dakshin Dinajpur

CC/48/2021

Smt. Chaina Roy Mondal, W/O- Late Ahindra Nath Mondal - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Debashis Barman

16 Aug 2022

ORDER

The brief facts of the complaint case is that the complainant is an investor of Sahara India Pariwar under Kamarpara F.C, Dakshin Dinajpur and she invested the amount of Rs.(26300+26,300+24,750)=Rs.77,350/-(Rupees seventy seven   thousand three hundred fifty only) under the scheme of GOLDEN 24 of  Humara India Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd. on 14.07.2018  for a period of 24 months along with respective joining points against which the opposite party issued three separate certificates and the maturity date of above investments was on 14.07.2020 and the  total maturity amount was ( 32991+31046 +32991)=Rs.97,028/- ( Rupees ninety seven thousand twenty eight only). The joining point of this aforesaid scheme will be calculated as one joining may be calculated as Rs.100 which has been mentioned back page of the certificates. After the date of maturity of the above said investments, the complainant went to the office of the O.P and submits her prayer for claim of the maturity amount but the O.P. refused to give the received copy.  Thereafter in different occasions the complainant went to the office of the O.P. for getting her maturity amount of the aforesaid investments. But in every occasion the O.P. took new plea.  Till today the O.P. did not pay the maturity amount to the complainant. Lastly on 24.09.2021 the complainant submits her prayer for demand through registry post vide postal receipt no.EW894359511IN. But the O.P. did nothing. Then Finding no other alternatives the complainant files this instant case against the O.P. claiming the total invested amount of Rs.77350 /-  along with 1097 joining points and maturity benefits, interest as per the terms & conditions laid down in the scheme of  GOLDEN 24, compensation of Rs 40,000  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 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 one Certificate by firisti -

 

 

Sl No.	Certificate No.	Date	Amount	Maturity date	Maturity value with joining point
1.	438000501482	14.07.2018	Rs.26,300/-	14.07.2020	(Rs.32,991/-+373x100)= Rs.70,291/-
2.	438000501483	14.07.2018	Rs.24750/-	14.07.2020	(Rs.31,046/-+351x100)= Rs.66146/-
3.	438000501483	14.07.2018	Rs 26,300/-	14.07.2020	(Rs.32,991/-+373x100)= Rs.70,291/-

 

 2. Postal receipt no.EW894359511IN.

3. Prayer for maturity claim dated 20.09.2021.

O.P. has 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 Rs. 77,350/- (rupees seventy seven thousand three hundred fifty only) under the scheme of GOLDEN  24 OF Humara India 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 2 (7) 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 fact that the complainant had invested total amount of Rs. 77,350/- (seventy seven thousand three hundred fifty only) under the scheme of GOLDEN 24 of Humara India Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd. of opposite party on 14.07.2018 for a period of 24 months against which the opposite party duly issued three separate certificates to the complainant. This is also admitted fact that the maturity period of 24 months was already over on 14.07.2020. This is also not disputed that the complainant has not yet received any single farthing 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 she is entitled to get maturity amount of Rs.2,06,728./-   (rupees two lakh six thousand seven hundred twenty eight only) together with interest as per terms and condition of the scheme but the O.P. have violated the terms and conditions and there is no denial of the fact about lack of responsibility in discharging the duty on the part of the O.P. and their lies deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.

Accordingly all the points are decided in favour of the complainant against the O.P. Thus all the points are disposed of.

  Hence, it is

                                                             O R D E R E D

             That the Consumer complaint Case No.48/21 is allowed on contest in part with cost against the O.P. The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.206 728/- (two lakh six thousand seven hundred twenty eight only) as maturity value of the invested amount together 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. 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.