(Per Mr.P.N.Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)
(1) This is an appeal filed by M/s.Global Infrastructure & Technologies Ltd., original opponent against the order passed by the South Mumbai District Forum in consumer complaint No.55/2000 and 56 to 58/2000 by allowing the complaints by common order, the opponent was directed to pay `10,000/- to the complainant in each complaint along with interest @15% p.a. from the date of its falling due till realisation of the amount. So also the opponent has been directed to pay cost of `2,000/- to each complainant. The forum has further directed to the opponent that the payment shall be made within two months from the date of this order, failing which the decretal amount will carry interest @18% p.a. from the date of complaint till realisation of the amount. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant/original opponent filed this appeal.
(2) The original complainant in all 4 complaints are the family members and they deposited `10,000/- each with M/s.Mantri Credit & Capital Ltd. The deposits were invested for a year with interest @ 15% p.a. payable quarterly. The deposits were not paid back by the opponent to the complainant along with interest. Hence, the complainant filed consumer complaint. The forum below directed the opponent who was formerly known as Mantri Credit & Capital Ltd., but after amalgamation it became Global Infrastructure and Technologies Ltd to pay the deposits with interest. The opponent contested the complaint. The opponent pleaded that in a reference made to Company Law Board it formulated the scheme of repayment of the amount to the Creditors including Depositors vide order dated 4th September, 2000. Therefore, the forum has no jurisdiction to try the complaints. It was also defence of the opponent that the matter was pending before the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, New Delhi and therefore, Under Section 22 (1) of the SICA Act no proceeding for recovery of money can be filed against it. It, therefore, had prayed for dismissal of the complaints. The forum below held that proceeding pending before the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, New Delhi cannot bar the poor depositors from approaching the forum for recovery of the dues. Moreover, without being a party in the proceeding before the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, New Delhi, the depositors can proceed against the opponent company for getting refund of deposits. Moreover, the forum held that the remedy approaching the Consumer Forum is additional remedy for the depositors who may approach to the Company Board. For these reasons, the forum below disregarded the defence of the opponent and passed order to refund `10,000/- each to complainant along with interest @ 15% p.a. and `2,000/- as costs to each complainant. Aggrieved by this award, the appellant/original opponent filed this appeal.
(3) This appeal is lying unattended from This appeal was placed before us for first order on 02/08/2011. On finding that the appellant and respondent were absent, we directed the office to issue notice to both the parties and adjourned to 23/09/2011 i.e. today. On 16/08/2011, office sent notice to both the parties by ordinary post. Today, both the parties are absent. We perused the impugned order. We are finding that the order is rightly passed by the District Forum by directing the opponent to refund the deposit amounts with accrued interest from the date of its falling due as the opponents failed to refund the same to the complainants. The order passed by the forum below is just and proper and is sustainable in law. There is no merit in the appeal. Hence, the order.
ORDER
(1) Appeal stands dismissed.
(2) No order as to costs.
(3) Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced on 23rd September, 2011.
