West Bengal

Dakshin Dinajpur

CC/26/2021

Smt. Putul Paul, W/O- Nayan Chandra Paul - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Sector Manager, Sahara India Pariwar, Balurghat Sector - 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. The complainant invested the total amount of Rs 41,000/- in a policy under the scheme of Sahara. E. Shine   on 30.05.2012 for a period of 96 months against which the O.P. issued a certificate vide No. 35100331082. After the date of maturity (30.05.2020) of the aforesaid investment, the complainant went to the office of the O.P.  for getting her maturity. The complainant submits her prayer before the O.P. for several times but the O.P. refused to give receive copy .In several occasions the complainant went to the office of the O.P. for getting her maturity amount but in every occasions the O.P .took a new plea.  The O.P. was adopting a dilatory tactics to disburse the maturity amount of the policy. Lastly on 15.07.2021 the complainant send a prayer for demand of maturity amount through registry post vide postal receipt no.EW946559935IN. But 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 of Rs 10792/-  along with interest @12 p.a and benefits as per the terms and conditions laid down in the scheme of Sahara –E Shine and compensation of Rs. 15,000/- for mental pain and agony ,Rs 10,000/-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 three Certificates by firisti: -

 

Sl No.	Certificate No.	Date	Amount	Maturity date	Maturity value
1.	351003310820	30.05.2012	Rs41,000/-	30.05.2020	Rs.107092/-

 

 

 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

Is the complainant a consumer to the opposite party?

Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

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 Rs41,000/- (forty one thousand only) under  the scheme of Sahara E Shine  of the opposite party. So, there is no hesitation to hold that the complainant is a consumer within the meaning under section 2 (1) (d) of Consumer Protection Act 1986.

 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. 41,000/- (Forty thousand only) under Sahara E Shine Scheme of Sahara Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd. of the opposite party on 30.05.2012 for a period of 96 months against which the opposite party duly issued a certificate to the complainant. This is also admitted fact that the maturity period of 96 months was already over on 30.05.2020. This is also not disputed that the complainant has not yet received any single furthering from the Op against the aforesaid investment.

 

We have looked into the complaint, the written version of the Op and evidence filed by the parties minutely. All these reveal that the complainant is a bona-fide consumer of the Op and she is entitled to get maturity amount of Rs.107092/- (rupees one lakh seven thousand ninety two only) together with interest as per terms and condition of the scheme but the Op 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 Op and their lies deficiency in service on the part of the Op.

 Hence, it is

                                                                                   O R D E R E D

          That the Consumer complaint Case No.26/2021 is allowed on contest in part with cost against the Op. The Opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs 107092/-(one lakh seven thousand ninety two 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 Op 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.