- (1.) AGAINST the order dated 19. 4. 89, passed by the District Forum, Kota, in complaint case No. 23/1989 M/s. Sahara India Savings and Investment Corporation Ltd. , Sector Office, Kothri, Gordhanpura Chowraha, Kota (Raj.) ("the Company") has filed this revision petition though captioned as appeal. The District Forum, Kota has held that it has jurisdiction to hear and decide the complaint filed against the company by the complainants-non-petitioners purporting to be under sec. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act No. 68 of 1986) ("the Act" ).
(2.) THE the complaint dated 3. 3. 89, it was alleged that the opposite-party-petitioner by alluring the members of the public entrapped them and enrolled them as its members. At the time of enrolements, an assurance was given that when the amount will be required, it will be repaid. THE agent of the company came to collect the amounts from the complainants for about one year in the court premises but for the last two months from the date of the filing of the complaint but thereafter he did not come. THEre was news that the company is going in liquidation. Eight days before, the agent was seen going in the court premises and so the complainants called him and enquired from him the reasons for not coming and asked him to make payments to which he refused. It has been alleged that the Company cannot refuse to make payment of the amounts deposited by them. It was prayed that the opposite party may be ordered to return/ refund the deposited amount and appropriate action may be taken against the Company. This complaint was jointly presented by the depositors-complainants. It may be mentioned that they have been impleaded as respondents (non-petitioners) in the revision petition. Notice was issued to the company. It filed its version of the case dated 4-4-89, contesting the complaint on various grounds. Three preliminary objections were raised on behalf of the opposite-party-petitioner; (1) that the complaint does not relate to the "goods" and "service" as defined in the Act. The complainants are not consumers and they have no locus standi to file the complaint. For these reasons, the District Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint under the Act; (2) that the complainants are depositors in the Savings Deposit Scheme of the company and there is separate agreement between each of the complainants and the compay. As such, the complainants are not entitled to any relief, for, they are bound by the terms of the agreement. As the complainants and the company both are bound by the terms of the agreement, no relief can be granted contrary to the terms contained in the respective agreements; (3) that there is a provision in the written contract between the complainants and the company that in case of any dispute between them, for the settlement of the dispute, the matter will be referred to the arbitrator to be appointed by the Company for decision and, therefore, the District Forum, cannot hear the complaint and jurisdiction in that of civil court. On merits, the facts stated in the complaint were denied. At present, we are not concerned with the merits.
(3.) A rejoinder was filed by the complainants refuting the preliminary objections and also the averments made in the complaint. The District Forum heard the arguments on the preliminary objections and held that the District Forum has jurisdiction to hear and decide the complaint of the complainants and in this view of the matter, the preliminary objections raised by the company were over-ruled. It may be stated here that the main reason that prevailed with the District Forum in repelling the preliminary objections was that the grievance of the complamants is with respect to the improper accounts maintained by the company. Before us, the complainants-non-petitioners did not appear and, therefore, we were left with no alternative but to hear the learned counsel for the opposite-party-petitioner. Mr. Onkar Singh Lakhawat, Advocate for the petitioner has reiterated the very same three preliminary objections which were raised before the District Forum, Kota. Firstly, the argued that the complainants and the company are governed by the contract which the complainants had entered with the company and in this case, there is no question of any 'service' being rendered by the Company to the complainants. It may be stated that the District Forum was of the opinion that the business of the Company constituted banking as the company collected the amounts, agreed to pay interest on them and after the expiry of the fixed time, it is required to repay the amounts with interest to the persons who have deposited the amounts and as banking has been included in the definition of 'service' mentioned in sec. 2 (l) (o) of the Act, the aforesaid acts done by the Company fall under the category of the banking which is included in the definition of the 'service'. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite-party petitioner invited our attention to the definition of 'banking' given in sec. 5 (b) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1949') which is as under :- " (b) "banking" means the accepting for, the purpose of lending or investment, of deposits of money from the public, repayable on demand or otherwise and withdrawal by cheque, draft, order or otherwise. " Banking Company has been defined in sec. 5 (c) of the Act of 1949. We may usefully refer to sec. 7 of the Act of 1949, which is as follows : - "7. Use of words "bank", "banker", "banking" or "banking company".- (1) No company other than a banking company shall use as part of its name any of the words "bank", "banker" or "banking" and no company shall carry on the business of banking in India unless it uses as part of its name atleast one of such words. (2) No firm, individual or group of individuals shall, for the purpose of carrying on any business, use as part of its or his name any of the words "bank", "banking" or "banking company". (3) Nothing in this section shall apply to - (a) a subsidiary of a banking company formed for one or more of the purposes mentioned in sub-sec. (1) of sec. 19, whose name indicates that it is a subsidiary of that banking company; (b) any association of banks formed for protection of their mutual interests and registered under sec. 25 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956 ). " It was submitted in this connection that the company has floated some types of saving deposit scheme on some terms and conditions which are contained in the agreement between the parties. They are in the nature of cumulative Deposit Account, Golden Deposit Account, Golden Daily Deposit Account, Gold head. Cash Certificate, Family Welfare Account etc. The person who deposits the amount in any of the schemes has to fill the blank form. The amounts so deposited are returned with interest after the expiry of the stipulated period in the agreement form. ;