West Bengal

Dakshin Dinajpur

CC/31/2021

Smt. Purabi Sarkar, W/O- Arup Sarkar - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Debashis Barman

11 Jul 2022

ORDER

   The brief fact of the complaint case is that the complainant is an investor of Sahara India Pariwar. The complainant invest a total sum of Rs 109,850/- (21,550/-+21,550/-+50,000/-+16,750/-) for a term of 36 months under the scheme of Super BB on 30.12.2017 and kamarpara Branch issued four separate Super BB certificates maturing on 30.12.2020 along with respective joining points. It is also mentioned in the policy certificates that each joining points may be calculated as Rs 100. All the above mentioned policies were in the name of the complainant. After the maturity of the above mentioned policies the complainant wants to get her maturity amount and submits her prayer to the office of the O.P. in various occasions and asked for encashment of those matured certificates. But the O.P. did not co-operate with the complainant and refused to give the received copy of her prayer.  Lastly, the complainant on 19.04.2021 submits her prayer for claim to the O.P. through the registry post, vide postal receipt no EW894359794IN. The complainant deposited the above mentioned money for her better future and to fulfill her needs at the time of crisis. But till today the complainant did not get her maturity amount.   Due to the illegal activities of the O.P. the complainant suffered irreparable loss and pecuniary injury.  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 principle amount of Rs.1,09,850/-  with the maturity value of the joining points along with maturity benefits and  interest as per the SUPER BB scheme  and compensation of Rs. 50,000/-  , Rs 20,000/-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. 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 four Certificates by firisti: -

Sl No.	Certificate No.	Date	Invested  Amount	Maturity date	Maturity Amount along with Joining point amount
1.	467000117786	30.12.2017	Rs.50,000/-	30.12.2020	(75,589 +434 x100)=118,989/-
2	467000117785	30.12.2017	Rs.21,550/-	30.12.2020	(41,507+245x100)=66,007/-
3	467000117783	30.12.2017	Rs.21,550/-	30.12.2020	(41,507/-+246x100)=66,107/-
4.	467000117784	30.12.2017	Rs.16,750/-	30.12.2020	(32,339+191x100)=51,439/-

 

1. Original letter dated 19.04.2021.

2. postal receipt vide no EW894359794IN.

3. Xerox copy of the voter I card of the complainant.

 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 Rs. 109,850/- (one lakh nine thousand eight hundred fifty) only under  the scheme of  SUPER BB 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   invest a sum of Rs 1,09,850/- for a term of 36 months and the O.P. has issued four separate certificates of SUPER BB policy  on 30.12.2017 along with respective joining points. It is also admitted fact that the maturity period of 36 months was already over on 30.12.2020. 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 Rs.3,02,542/- (Rupees three lakh two thousand five hundred forty two) only 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.31/2021 is allowed on contest in part with cost against the O.P. The Opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,02,542/- (three lakh two thousand five hundred forty two rupees) 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.