Dt. of filing – 15/05/2018

Dt. of Judgement – 26/12/2019

Mrs. Sashi Kala Basu, Hon’ble President

        This consumer complaint is filed by the Complainant namely Smt. Bandana Mondal under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite Parties namely 1) The Sector Manager, Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Ltd., Kolkata-700063 2) The Branch Manager, Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Ltd., Kolkata-743331 and 3) The Director, Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Ltd., Aliganj, Lucknow-226024 alleging deficiency in service on their part.

          Case of the Complainant in short is that being influenced by the presentation of one Jhanturam Paik an agent of the Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Ltd /Opposite Party No.1, Complainant decided to invest in a scheme Sahara M. Benefit at a total monthly instalment of Rs.7,000/- for 60 months starting from 21/10/2011. So, the Complainant has deposited a total sum of Rs.4,20,000/- for 60 months i.e. from 21/10/2011 to 12.09.2016. As per the scheme Complainant was supposed to get Rs.5,20,000/- on its maturity on 21/10/2016. Opposite Parties issued a Pass Book being Account No.18013702616 and acknowledged the periodical monthly deposit in the said Pass Book. But after the maturity of the said monthly scheme on 21/10/2016 when the Complainant contacted with the Opposite Party No.3 for payment of the maturity amount, Opposite Parties neglected to pay the said amount. After waiting for more than one year Complainant thus sent a legal notice through her Ld. Advocate on 20/4/2018. But the Opposite Parties paid no heed. Thus the present complaint has been filed by the Complainant praying to refund back maturity value of Rs.5,20,000/- to the Complainant, to pay interest @10% p.a. on the said amount, to pay Rs.30,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost.

          Complainant has annexed with the complaint extract of the Pass Book and the copy of the notice dated 20/4/2018 sent by the Complainant to the Opposite Parties.

Opposite Parties have contested the case by filing written version denying and disputing allegations contending inter alia that inspite of several requests the Complainant did not produce the original Sahara M. Benefit Certificate before the Opposite Parties. It is also contended that the Complainant requested the Opposite Parties for re-investment of her maturity amount. Thus Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the case.

          During the course of evidence Complainant filed her affidavit-in-chief followed by filing questionnaire by the Opposite Parties and the reply therein by the Complainant. Opposite Parties have also filed the evidence but no questionnaire was filed by the Complainant and thus ultimately argument has been heard of both sides.

          So the only point requires determination.

Whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons

          In support of her claim that she invested/deposited Rs.7,000/- each for 60 months with the Opposite Party No.1 and on receiving of the same the relevant entry was made in the Pass Book, Complainant has filed the Pass Book wherefrom it appears that till September, 2016 Complainant paid a total amount of Rs.4,20,000/-. On a careful perusal of the terms and conditions in the said Pass Book issued by the Opposite Parties, it appears that on deposit of amount by the Complainant/customer, the Opposite Parties were to issue the receipts duly counter signed by the authorised signatory with seal. No such receipts have been filed in this case. At the time of hearing of argument, Ld. Advocate fairly submitted that the receipts were not issued. However it may be pertinent to point out that as per the said terms and conditions, Complainant was under obligation to take the receipts on payment, which has not been done by the Complainant in this case. But on a careful perusal of the written version it appears that the Opposite Parties have not disputed and denied the payment made by the Complainant. The relevant para in the written version runs as follows:

          “Contention of the paragraph no. 6 is matter of record. The fact remains that Complainant on 20/3/2018 came to the office of Opposite Parties and requested your petitioners for reinvestments of her maturity amount.” So by the said recital in the written version in paragraph 5, Opposite Parties have admitted about the deposit of the amount for 60 months as claimed by the Complainant. In such case of admission by the Opposite Parties, Complainant is entitled to the maturity amount as claimed by her, as in order to establish that on 20/3/2018 Complainant went to the Office and requested for reinvestment of her maturity amount, Opposite Parties have not filed a single scrap of paper. So far as the contention of the Opposite Parties that the Complainant did not produce the original documents for internal process, Opposite Parties have again not filed any document in this regard. It is already highlighted above that the Complainant has filed the original Pass Book before this Forum showing the deposit for 60 months as claimed by her. So Complainant is entitled to the matured amount as prayed. However, we do not inclined to pass any order as to interest or compensation as prayed by the Complainant as maturity amount is much more than what was deposited by the Complainant.

Hence,

                 ORDERED

CC/252/2018 is allowed on contest.

Opposite Parties are directed to pay maturity amount of Rs.5,20,000/- to the Complainant within 2(Two) months from the date of this order. They are further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost within the aforesaid period of 2(Two) months in default the entire sum shall carry interest @8% p.a. till realisation.