DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.206 of 23-02-2016

Decided on 06-09-2016

Harsh Garg aged about 11 years minor S/o Mukesh Garg R/o C/o Choudhary Medical Hall, School Road, Tapa, Tehsil Tapa, District Barnala under the guardianship of his father Mukesh Garg S/o Rajinder Kumar R/o C/o Choudhary Medical Hall, School Road, Tapa, Tehsil Tapa, District Barnala.

........Complainant

Versus

1.PACL India Limited (Pearls), Corporate Office, 7^th Floor, Gopal Dass Bhawan, 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001, through its Authorized Signatory/Managing Director.

2.PACL India Limited (Pearls), S.C.F No.12, Bibiwala Chowk, Bharat Nagar, Bathinda, through its Branch Manager.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM

Sh.M.P Singh Pahwa, President.

Sh.Jarnail Singh, Member.

Present:-

For complainant: None.

Opposite parties: Ex-parte.

ORDER

Jarnail Singh, Member

1. The complainant Harsh Garg under the guardianship of his father Mukesh Garg (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed complaint U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against opposite parties PACL India Limited (Pearls) and Other (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties).

2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he has availed the services of opposite parties and invested a total sum of Rs.10,000/- with them through fixed deposit on 16.5.2009. It was agreed between opposite parties and complainant that opposite parties will handover him an estimated sum of Rs.20,900/- on 16.8.2015. Opposite parties issued a policy-cum-registration letter bearing No.U018135147.

3. It is alleged that the complainant was in dire need of money and according to agreement and terms and conditions, he approached the office of opposite party No.2 in the month of August 2015. He tried to submit the registration letter-cum-policy in the office of opposite party No.2 and requested it to surrender his policy and to release an amount of Rs.20,900/- alongwith interest but opposite party No.2 has refused to accept the policy. Despite repeated requests to opposite party No.2, no money was disbursed to him till date.

   On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties and has prayed for directions to them for payment of amount of Rs.20,900/- alongwith interest and also claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.5000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.3000/-. Hence, this complaint.

4. Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of opposite parties. As such, ex-parte proceedings were taken against them.

5. Complainant was afforded opportunities to produce evidence.

6. In support of his claim, the complainant has tendered into evidence his own affidavit dated 20.2.2016, (Ex.C1); photocopy of acknowledgment, (Ex.C2) and closed the evidence.

7. Today the case was fixed for arguments, but none has appeared on behalf of the complainant. The complainant has already produced the evidence. Therefore, we proceed further to decide the complaint on the basis of evidence already produced by the complainant.

8. From the contents of the complaint and relief claimed by the complainant, it is apparent that the complainant has claimed investor of opposite parties. Civil Appeal Nos.13301, 13319, 13394 and 13304 of 2015 titled as Subrata Bhattacharya Vs. Securities & Exchange Board of India relates to some investors who invested their money with PACL Limited (opposite party). Hon'ble Apex Court has passed the order vide which SEBI shall constitute committee for disposing of land purchased by company so that the sale proceedings can be paid to investors, who have invested the amount in the company for purchase of land. It is further ordered that the decision with regard to sale of property of company by committee is not to be interfered by any court.

9. The Paras No.3, 7, 12 and 13 of the order passed in the abovesaid Civil Appeal are relevant and extracted as under:-

   “3) The SEBI shall constitute a Committee for disposing of the land purchased by the Company so that the sale proceeds can be paid to the investors, who have invested their funds in the Company for purchase of the land. Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.M. Lodha, the former Chief Justice of India, would be the Chairman of the said Committee. It would be open to the Hon'ble Chairman of the Committee to appoint such experts or other persons, as he might think it necessary, in consultation with the SEBI, .so as to enable the Committee to sell the land and pay to the investors in a manner that might be decided by the said Committee.

   7) The methodology with regard to recovery of amount by sale of the land and disbursement of the amount to the investors shall be overseen by the Members of the Committee.

   12) The amount, which is lying in the bank accounts of the Company and other cash belonging to the Company shall be released in favour of SEBI so that it can be used either for disbursement in favour of the investors or for incurring necessary expenditure. If any amount has been deposited by the Company or by its Directors or by any other person on behalf of the Company in any Court, the same shall be released in favour of the SEBI, who shall have a separate account so as to deal with the same. The Committee shall also decide as to whether the staff of the Company should be continued or relieved.

   13) The decision with regard to sale of property of the company by the Committee shall not be inferred with by any Court.”

10. The Hon'ble Committee under the orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court has already seized of the matter in question. In this complaint, it is not disputed that the complainant namely Harsh Garg is one of the investor, who made investment with opposite parties i.e. PACL Limited.

11. In view of aforesaid directions of Hon'ble Apex Court, we are of the opinion that this Forum cannot pass an executable order against opposite parties. Therefore, this complaint is disposed off accordingly. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the Hon'ble Committee to seek his claim.

12. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.

13. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record.

    Announced:-

    06-09-2016

    (M.P Singh Pahwa)

    President

     

     

    (Jarnail Singh)

    Member