BEFORE THE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD.
F.A.No.612/2009 AGAINST E.A.No.39/09 in C.C.No.112/2007, DISTRICT FORUM-1,Hyderabad.
Between:
Managing Director ,
Deepika Chit Fund Private Limited,
Rep. by its Director A.Sivarama Prasad,
Konark Towers, Flat no.101,
Musarambagh, Hyderabad. ,,, Appellant/
Opp.party
And
Kalisetty Surya Rao, S/o.K.Chittayya,
Aged about 32 years, D.No.3-297/1,
Godavari Devi Nagar, Anjeneya Puram,
Chepurupalli, Vijayanagaram Dist. … Respondent/
Complainant
Counsel for the Appellant : M/s.S.Syam Sundar Rao
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.G.Ananda Rao
F.A.No.616/2009 AGAINST E.A.No.40/09 in C.C.No.113/2007, DISTRICT FORUM-1,Hyderabad.
Between:
Managing Director ,
Deepika Chit Fund Private Limited,
Rep. by its Director A.Sivarama Prasad,
Konark Towers, Flat no.101,
Gaddiannaram Cross Roads
Musarambagh, DSNR.,
Hyderabad. ,,, Appellant/
Opp.party
And
Kalisetty Surya Rao, S/o.K.Chittayya,
Aged about 32 years, D.No.3-297/1,
Godavari Devi Nagar, Anjeneya Puram,
Chepurupalli, Vijayanagaram Dist. … Respondent/
Complainant
Counsel for the Appellant : M/s.S.Syam Sundar Rao
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.G.Ananda Rao
F.A.No.993/2009 AGAINST E.A.No.38/09 in C.C.No.111/2007, DISTRICT FORUM-1,Hyderabad.
Between:
Managing Director ,
Deepika Chit Fund Private Limited,
Rep. by its Director A.Sivarama Prasad,
Konark Towers, Flat no.101,
Gaddiannaram Cross Roads
Musarambagh,DSNR., Hyderabad-060. ,,, Appellant/
Opp.party
And
Kalisetty Uma Sankar, S/o.K.Suryarao,
Aged about 32 years, D.No.3-297/1,
Godavari Devi Nagar, Anjeneya Puram,
Chepurupalli, Vijayanagaram Dist. … Respondent/
Complainant
Counsel for the Appellant : M/s.S.Syam Sundar Rao
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.G.Ananda Rao
QUORUM:THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT.
AND
SMT.M.SHREESHA, HON’BLE MEMBER
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND TEN.
Oral Order (Per Smt.M.Shreesha, Hon’ble Member)
*****
These appeals have been filed by the opposite parties aggrieved by the order of the District Forum in E.A.Nos.39/09.,40/09,and 38/09 respectively which arise out of C.C.Nos. 112/07 ,113/07 and 111/07 respectively.. Since all these appeals deal with common facts they are being disposed of by this common order in F.A.612/09.
The complainant filed C.C.112/07 against the appellant/ opp.party seeking recovery of Rs.91,750/- including interest, compensation and costs and District Forum vide its order dt.30.7.2007 directed the opp.party to pay an amount of Rs.91,750/- with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of last instalment till the date of realization together with costs of Rs.1000/- .
It is the case of the complainant that the appellant/opp.party did not comply with the order of the District Forum and as such he preferred E.A.No.39/09 in which the appellant/opp.party filed counter and also filed a memo dt.30.6.09 that as per the scheme the appellant paid part payment of Rs.20,000/- vide DD.No.102739 dt.10.6.2009 for Rs.20,000/- and the balance to be paid to the complainant is Rs.37,817/- .
It is the case of the appellant/opp.party that after receiving notice in E.A.No.39/09 they filed counter along with judgement of the Hon’ble High Court in C.P.No.196 and 197 /03 dt. 25.11.08 . The claim pertaining to the complainant herein is Claim no.3568 for an amount of 51,817 /- and the details are as follows:
“ 1.VZLP 31-3 Chit Series No. ,
22 months instalments paid principal amount of Rs.16,097/-
As per scheme interest 4% for 28 months
1.12.2000 to 1.4.2003 Rs.1537
Total Rs.17,634/-
2. VZLT31-15 Chit Series No.
38 months instalments paid Principal amount Rs.26,383/-
As per scheme interest 4% fro 28 months
1.12.2000 to 1.4.2003 Rs.2523/-
Total Rs. 28,906/-
3. VZLT1C -31 Chit Series No.
23 months installments paid and Principal amount of Rs.10,291/-
As per scheme interest 4% for 28 months
1.12.2000 to 1.4.2003 Rs.986/-
Total Rs.11,277/-
Total : 17,634 + 28,906 + 11,277 = Rs.57,817/- “
We observe from the record that the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. while dealing with Company Petitions 196/03 and 197/03, through its order dt.31.3.2004 ordered that the stay granted in C.A.No.792 and 794 will continue to operate as long as the Committee is in force. We also observe from the record that the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. vide its order dt.9.11.2004 in C.A.No.795/03 held that “All the courts/forums in the state which are subordinate to this court shall not entertain any applications for attachment of the amounts and properties of transferor and transferee companies” and also held that “ in as much the matter is seized of by the Company Court, it is not open for the lower courts and other forums before whom the matters relating to the Transferor and Transferee Companies are pending to entertain the applications with regard to attachment of amounts and properties of the Transferor and Transferee Companies”. We also observe from the record that in F.A.No.916/03 in P.P.38/02 in C.D.No.207/01 on the file of Dist. Forum Guntur, this Commission allowed the F.A. on the ground that the appellant/opp.party approached High Court of A.P. in C.A.No.795/03 and the appeals were disposed of subject to the result of Company Application no.795/03. The learned counsel for the appellant/opp.party submitted that on 25.11.08 in C.P.Nos.196 and 197/2003 the Hon’’ble High Court passed the amalgamation order and also sanctioned the scheme which he contended is binding on the complainant. He drew our attention to page 11 of the order which deals with the mode of payment to the investor which is as follows:
“ It is now proposed in the scheme that a sum equal to the principal sum due and shown in the books of account of both the transferor and transferee companies as on the appointed date, along with interest at the rate of 4% p.a. from the date when the amount had become due till the appointed date, to be paid by such number of instalments, as may be proposed by the Collection and Dispersal Committee appointed by this Court.”
The learned counsel for the respondent/complainant contended the judgement of Hon’ble High Court in C.P.Nos.196 and 197/03 dt.25.11.08 is not binding on him as he is not a party to the proceedings. He also contended that that the scheme itself is not binding. The learned counsel for the respondent/complainant did not establish as to how the scheme which has been sanctioned by the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. on 25.11.08 in C.P.Nos.196 and 197/03 is not binding on the complainant. A perusal of the order of the High Court :
1. That this Court doth hereby sanction the scheme of amalgamation and doth hereby declare the same to be binding on the transferor company and the transferee company. Viz., Deepika Leasing and Finance Ltd., (Transferor Company) with Deepika Chit Fund Private Ltd., (Transferee Company).
2. That all the property, rights and powers of the transferor company specified in the scheme of amalgamation annexed here to and all the other property rights and powers of transferor company be transferred without further act or deed to the transferee accompany and accordingly the same shall pursuant to section 394(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 be transferred to and vest in the transferee company for all estate and interest of the transferor company therein but subject nevertheless to all charges now affecting the same.
3. That all the liabilities and duties of the transferor company be transferred without ; further act or deed to the transferee company and accordingly the same shall pursuant to section 394(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 be transferred to and become the liabilities and duties of the transferee Company,
4. That all proceedings now pending by or against the transferor company be continued by or against the transferee company,
5. That the transferee Company do without further application allot to such members of the transferor Company as have not given such notice of dissent as is required by the Scheme the shares in the transferee company to which they are entitled under the said Scheme of amalgamation and.
6. That the transferor company do within 30 days after the date of this order cause a certified copy of this order to be delivered to the Registrar of Companies for registration and on such certified copy being so delivered the transferor company shall stand dissolved and the Registrar of Companies shall place all documents relating to the transferor company and registered with him on the file kept by him in relation to the transferee company and the files relation to the said two companies shall be consolidated Accordingly.
7. That any person interested shall be at liberty to apply to the Court in the above matter for any directions that may be necessary.
8. That there be no order as to costs in both the company petitions.
The learned counsel for the appellant also filed a copy of the scheme of arrangement between Deepika Leasing and Finance Pvt. Ltd. and Deepika Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd. and respective share holders and creditors. We find force in the contention of the appellant/opp.party as per sec.391(2) of Company Law, if majority number representing three fourths in value of the creditors or class of creditors, or members or class of members as the case may be present or voting either in person or by proxy (under rules made under sec.343), at the meeting agree to any compromise or arrangement, the compromise or arrangement shall, if sanctioned by the High Court be binding on all the creditors”. There is no documentary evidence on behalf of the complainants to contradict this contention and also keeping in view the order of the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. dt.25.11.08 in C.P. Nos.196 and 197/08 and the fact that the opp.party has already paid the principal amount together with 4% interest we are of the considered view that the payment of the balance amount should be as per the provisions of the Scheme and directions of the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. Therefore these appeals are allowed and the order of the District Forum in E.A.Nos.39/09, EA.40/09 and EA.38/09 are set aside.
With the aforementioned directions these appeals F.A.Nos.612 /09, 616/09 and 993 /09 are allowed and the orders of the Dist. Forum in E.A.Nos.39/ 09, 40/09 and 38/09 respectively are set aside . No costs.
PRESIDENT
MEMBER
Dt. 29.12.2010
