M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PLOT NO. 76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (M.P.)

CC No.16 / 2022.

FILED ON :29.6.2022.

Smt. Savita Sondhiya,

w/o Shri Rakesh Sondhiya,

R/o Tilak Ward, Devri,

District Sagar (M.P.).

…. COMPLAINANT.

Versus

Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Ltd.,

Aliganj, Lucknow & Anr.

…. OPPOSITE PARTIES.

As per Shri Justice Shantanu Kemkar, (oral) :

Date of

O R D E R

Order

14.07.2022

Shri Naresh Choursia, learned counsel for the complainant.

Heard on the office objection about the maintainability.

2. As per the office report the complainant has filed this Consumer

Complaint alleging deficiency in service in not returning maturity amount of

fixed deposit certificates obtained by him depositing total amount of

Rs.39,27,000/-. He claimed return of deposited amount with interest

totalling to Rs.52,54,793/-.

-

2 -

3. The amount paid by his for obtaining fixed deposit certificates is

Rs.39,27,000/-. The relief claimed is of Rs.52,54,793/- as compensation.

4. In view of Section 47 (1) (a) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

read with the notification dated 30.12.2021 notifying the Consumer

Protection (Jurisdiction of the District Commission, State Commission and

National Commission) Rules, 2021, the State Commission has jurisdiction

to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as

consideration exceeds rupees fifty lakhs, but does not exceed rupees two

crores rupees.

5. In the present case, the amount paid by the complainants for

obtaining fixed deposit certificates is Rs.39,27,000/-. In the circumstances

and in view of the order passed by the National Commission in Consumer

Case No.833 of 2020 M/s Pyaridevi Chabiraj Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

National Insurance Company Limited & Ors. and the order passed by

this Commission in CC No.35 of 2020 (Smt. Swati Telang versus ICICI

Prudential Life insurance Co. Ltd. decided on 10.9.2020, we are of the view

that the complaint as filed by the complainants is within the pecuniary

jurisdiction of the District Commission and not of State Commission.

6. In view of the aforesaid as the complainant has to file complaint

before appropriate District Commission, the complaint is dismissed for want

-

3 -

of pecuniary jurisdiction with liberty to the complainant to file the complaint

before the appropriate District Commission in accordance with law.

7. The amount of court fees deposited be refunded to the complainants.

(Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar) (S. S. Bansal)

^{PRESIDENT MEMBER}

Phadke

Click Here to Read the rest of this document