BEFORE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD
F.A.No.365 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.09 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.75 OF 2004 DISTRICT FORUM MAHABOOBNAGAR
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-108/B, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, aged 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Rahana Begum D/o Jaffar Mia
Aged about 9 years, Minor rep. by her
Father Jaffer Mia S/o Jaheeruddin
Aged 53 years, Occ: Business,
R/o H.No.6-3-44/F/6, Behind Menaka Talkies
Mahabubnagar
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.369 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.10 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.76 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Md. Mujeebuddin, S/o Ameeruddin,
Age 32 years, R/o. H.No.6-3-44/F/6,
Behind Menaka Textiles,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.370 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.01 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.07 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Kum.Habeebunnisa D/o Jaffar Mia
Age 14 years, Rep. by her father Jaffar Mia
S/o Jaheeruddin, Age 43 years, Occ: Business
R/o H.No.6-3-44/F/6, Behind Menaka Talkies
Mahabubnagar
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.371 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.12 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.78 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Safiaya Begum, W/o Shaik Mia,
Age 25 years, R/o. H.No.6-3-44/F/6,
Behind Menaka Textiles,
Mahabubnagar. Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.372 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.13 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.79 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Ghousia Begum, D/o Jaffar Mia,
Age 19 years, R/o H.No.6-3-44/F/6,
Behind Menaka Talkies,
Mahabubnagar
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.373 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.20 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.80 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Roshan Ara, W/o. Mohd. Hameeduddin Khan
Age 34 years, Occ:House wife, R/o. H.No.3-34-39/1,
Madina Masjid, Mahabubnagar
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.374 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.21 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.81 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Roshan Ara, W/o. Mohd, Hameeduddin Khan,
Age 34 years, Occ: House Wife,
R/o. H.No.3-34-39/1. Madina Masjid,
Mahabuub Nagar. Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.375 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.22 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.82 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Roshan Ara, W/o. Mohd. Hameeduddin Khan,
Age 34 years, Occ:House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.376 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.23 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.83 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Roshan Ara, W/o Mohd, Hameeduddin Khan,
Age 34 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34,39/1, Madina Mashid,
Mahabubnagar
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.377 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.24 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.84 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Roshan Ara, W/o Mohd. Hameeduddin Khan,
Age 34 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.378 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.25 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.85 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Naseem Banu, W/o. Syed Ali,
Aged 59 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.379 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.26 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.86 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Naseem Banu, W/o. Syed Ali,
Aged 59 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.380 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.27 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.87 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Naseem Banu, W/o. Syed Ali,
Aged 59 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.381 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.28 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.88 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Naseem Banu, W/o. Syed Ali,
Aged 59 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.382 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.29 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.89 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Naseem Banu, W/o. Syed Ali,
Aged 59 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.383 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.30 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.90 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Naseem Banu, W/o. Syed Ali,
Aged 59 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.384 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.31 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.91 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Naseem Banu, W/o. Syed Ali,
Aged 59 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.385 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.32 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.92 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Naseem Banu, W/o. Syed Ali,
Aged 59 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.386 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.33 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.93 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Naseem Banu, W/o. Syed Ali,
Aged 59 years, Occ: House wife,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
F.A.No.387 OF 2013 AGAINST P.P.NO.34 OF 2005 IN C.D.NO.94 OF 2004
Between:
M/s Vahini Finance and Chit Fund Pvt Ltd.,
Regd.Off:7-5-105/3, Opp.Petrol Bunk,
Venkateswara Colony, Mahabubnagar
rep. by its Directors
1. P.Indrasena Reddy S/o Raghava Reddy
R/o 7-5-13/7/2b, Padmavathi Colony
Mahaboobnagar presently R/o Flat No.201
Swathi Apartments, Bagiratha Colony
Mahabubnagar District
2. P.Janardhan Reddy, aged about 53 years,
R/o Anuradha Industries, D-15, Industrial Estate
Mahabubnagar
3. B.Chandrasekar Gupta, Age 55 years,
R/o H.No.4/10/42, Ramnagar, Mahabubnagar
4. Surekha, W/o Vishwanatham, gaed 35 years
R/o H.No.1-4-134/6, Parimalagiri, Mahabubnagar
5. L.Ravikumar, aged 34 years,
R/o H.No.4-99, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
6. S.Kalawathy W/o Janardhan Reddy, aged 43 years
H.No.4-87, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar
7. P.Janaki W/o P.Balakrishna Reddy
Aged 47 years, H.No.4-34, Bhageeratha Colony
Mahabubnagar
Appellants/JDrs/opposite parties
A N D
Syed Ali,
Aged 63 years, Occ: Retired Community Health Officer,
R/o H.No.3-34-39/1, Madina Masjid,
Mahabubnagar.
Respondent/DHR/complainant
Counsel for the Appellant M/s B.Sai Kalyan Chakravarthi
Counsel for the Respondents Party in person
QUORUM: SRI R.LAKSHMINARASIMHA RAO, HON’BLE I/C PRESIDENT
SRI THOTA ASHOK KUMAR, HON’BLE MEMBER
AND
SRI S.BHUJANGA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER
MONDAY THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN
Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Hon’ble I/c President)
***
1. The opposite party company are the appellants. All the complaints are of similar nature and sprouted from identical circumstances and they are being disposed of by a common order. F.A.No.365 of 2013 arising out of the order in P.P.No.9 of 2005 in C.D.No.75 of 2004 is taken as lead case. The parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the complaint.
2. The complainant filed complaint before the District Forum seeking for refund of the amount deposited with the opposite party company. Some of the depositors filed criminal complaints with various police stations against the opposite party company and the District Collector cum Competent Authority under the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, Mahabubnagar issued proceedings on the basis of report of Inspector of Police, Rural PS Mahabubnagar and the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.172 dated 26.6.2003 attached the properties of the opposite party no.1 company under the provisions of the aforementioned statute.
3. In pursuance of attachment of properties as per G.O.Ms. No.172 dated 26.6.2003 the District Collector Mahabubnagar instituted a case against the opposite party company before the Special Court, in Cr.LMP No.656 of 2003 in Crime NO.1 of 2003. Some depositors filed complaint under the provisions of Sec.138 of NI Act against the opposite party company on the file of JMFC, Mahabubnagar. Both courts issued warrant against the opposite party company.
4. The opposite party company and its depositors entered into compromise and as per the terms of compromise, the opposite party company had undertaken to pay principal amount to the depositors in two instalments of 62% and 38%. The opposite party company made a representation on 23.6.2005 to the District Collector requesting him to transfer all the cases to the Special Court as per Section 6(3) of the Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999. However, the District Collector has not taken any steps therefor. The opposite party company approached the Hon’ble High Court by filing writ petition, W.P.No.13866 of 2005 seeking for direction to the competent authority to transfer all pending cases before the Consumer Forum and JMFC and Special Mobile Court, Mahabubnagar to the Special Court designated for the purpose under the provisions of Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999.
5. The opposite party company has filed copy of stay order passed by the High Court in W.P.M.P.No.17601 dated 30.9.2005 whereby all the cases pending before District Consumer Forum, JMFC and Special Mobile Court, Mahabubnagar were stayed for a period of four weeks. The order reads as under:
Heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner as well as Ashvini Kumar, learned counsel appearing for some of the unofficial respondents.
Though the matter underwent several adjournments, no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2.
Having regard to the specific provisions under the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act 1999, prima facie it appears that the District Consumer Forum, Mahaboobnagar and Judicial First Class Magistrate, Special Mobile Court, Mahaboobnagar have no jurisdiction to entertain the cases either for recovery of amount alleged to be due from M/s Vahini Finance & Chit Fund Private Limited, Mahaboobnagar or for prosecution of its directors.
In the circumstances, there shall be interim stay of the proceedings initiated by respondents 3 to 30 herein pending before the District Consumer Forum, Mahaboobnagar and the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Special Mobile Court, Mahaboobnagar for a period of 4 weeks from today”.
6. The opposite party company has submitted that it has paid principal amount in two instalments i.e., 62% and 38% to all the depositors including the complainant and the depositors received the amount without raising any protest thereto. The learned counsel for the opposite party company has submitted that in view of the compromise entered into between the parties the High Court disposed of the writ petition with the following order:
The learned counsel for petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive as of now for further adjudication and it has become infructuous.
In view of the same, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order as to costs.
7. In view of the compromise entered into between the parties, the complaint in C.C.No.1 of 2005 on the file of Sessions Judge Mahabubnagar was transferred to Lok Adalat Mahabubnagar and it was numbered as L.A.Case No.146 of 2008. Before the Lok Adalat, according to the opposite party company the offence was compounded and the opposite party company was acquitted for the charge u/s 420 IPC. The District Forum passed order dated 21.12.2004 directing the opposite party company to pay principal amount along with interest.
8. The complainant has filed P.P.No.9 of 2005 for non-compliance of the order in C.D.No.75 of 2004. The penalty petitions have been kept pending for about eight years and meanwhile, according to the learned counsel for the opposite party company the complainant received her principal amount in two instalments i.e., 62% and 38% in the year 2009 without raising any protest.
9. The learned counsel for the opposite party company has submitted that the complainant kept quiet for three years since the date of receipt of principal amount and thereafter proceeded to prosecute the penalty petition for payment of interest and the opposite party company filed counter in the penalty proceedings and prayed for dismissal of the penalty petition. The District Forum, according to the learned counsel for the opposite party company without taking consideration of the pleadings of the opposite party company issued NBWs against the Directors of the opposite party company vide docket order dated 10.5.2013.
10. The learned counsel for the opposite party company has submitted that once the complainant has received the amount in terms of compromise entered into between the complainant and the opposite party company, continuation of penalty proceedings and issue of NBWs against the directors of the opposite party company amounts to abuse of process of law and he has submitted that the District Forum has not followed the procedure prescribed u/s 200 Cr.P.C. before issuing summons, warrants to the directors of the opposite party company.
11. The complainant has appeared in person and contended that the opposite party company has not complied with the order of the District Forum and as such she proceeded with the penalty proceedings against the directors of the opposite party company.
12. The point for consideration is whether the order of the District Forum issuing warrants against the directors of the opposite party company is vitiated by misappreciation of facts or law?
13. There is no denying of the fact that the complainant and other depositors filed complaints against the opposite party company before various authorities such as the District Collector, Police concerned and the District Forum. It is not denied that there had been compromise entered into between the parties during pendency of the writ petition before the High Court and subsequently the C.C. pending before the Special Court was transferred to Lok Adalat where in terms of the compromise offence u/s 420 was compounded against the directors of the opposite party company.
14. The opposite party company has challenged validity of continuation of penalty proceedings before the District Forum as also issuance of NBWs against its directors by the District Forum. It is to be noted that the District Forum has not followed procedure prescribed u/s 200 Cr.P.C. while entertaining the penalty petitions and by not following the prescribed procedure it has issued NBWs against the directors of the opposite party company. The order dated 10.5.2013 issuing the warrants against the directors of the opposite party company not following the procedure contemplated while entertaining the petition which is of criminal nature is vitiated and not sustainable in the eye of law.
15. It is pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Inder Mohan Goswami and another vs. State of Uttaranchal and others reported in (2007 AIR SCW 6679) has observed as under:
“49 Civilized countries have recognized that liberty is the most precious of all the human rights. The American declaration of Independence 1776, French Declaration of the Rights of Men and the Citizen 1789, Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights 1966 all speak with one voice – liberty is the natural and inalienable right of every human being. Similarity, Article 21 of our Constitution proclaims that no one shall be deprived of his liberty except in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law.
50. The issuance of non-bailable warrants involves interference with personal liberty. Arrest and imprisonment means deprivation of the most precious right of an individual. Therefore, the courts have to be extremely careful before issuing non-bailable warrants.
51. Just as liberty is precious for an individual so is the interest of the society in maintaining law and order. Both are extremely important for the survival of a civilized society. Sometimes in the target interest of the Public and the State it becomes absolutely imperative to curtail freedom of an individual for a certain period, only then the non-bailable warrants should be issued.
16. Procedure as contemplated under Section 200 Cr.P.C. has to be followed as Section 27 of C.P. Act compared to Sec.25 of the Act is criminal in nature and sworn statement of the complainant has to be recorded with respect to non-compliance of the order. An opportunity would be given to the JDr/Op for their reply with respect to compliance/non- compliance and only then next step could be ordered in accordance with law.
17. We observe from the record that the procedure has not been followed, and therefore we set-aside the order dated 10.5.2013 of the Dist. Forum with respect to issuing of NBWs against the directors of the opposite party company. The District Forum shall follow the procedure prescribed by Section 200 Cr.P.C. and after recording the statement of the complainant only, it shall proceed with the next steps in the penalty petitions.
17. In the result this appeals are allowed setting aside the order dated 10.5.2013 of the District Forum. The District Forum shall follow the procedure contemplated u/s 200 Cr.P.C. The parties shall appear before the District Forum on 28.1.2014. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
I/C PRESIDENT
Sd/-
MEMBER
Sd/-
MEMBER
Dt.30.12.2013
కె.ఎం.కె.*
