Gurbaaj Singh Vs PACL CC 1888/2015

2.6.2016 Present: Sh. Chander Bansal counsel for complainant.

Sh. Rajneesh Kumar Bansal counsel for opposite parties.

During the pendency of the present complaint, the opposite parties have filed an application for dismissing the complaint in view of the order dated 2.2.2016 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Since the decision of this application directly affects the fate of the present complaint, therefore it is desirable to dispose of this application.

2. In the application the opposite parties have averred that vide order dated 2.2.2016 passed in Civil Appeal No. 13301/2015 titled Subrata Bhattacharya Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India constituted a Committee for deciding such matters. Therefore, it is requested that in view of the said order the present complaint may be dismissed.

3. The complainant filed the reply and opposed the said application and prayed for the dismissal of the same with costs.

4. We have heard counsel for parties and gone through all the record.

5. In Civil Appeal No. 13301/15 titled Subrata Bhattacharya Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India, the Hon'ble Apex Court in para No. 7 observed as.-

“ 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.”

6. The Hon'ble Apex Court further observed in para No. 13 as.-

“13. The decision with regard to sale of property of the Company by the Committee shall not be interfered with by any Court.”

7. Now coming to the present complaint, it is not disputed that the complainant is one of the investor who made investment with the opposite party company i.e. PACL Ltd.. It is also not disputed that the subject matter of the present complaint as well as that of the Hon'ble Committee is same qua the return of the money to the investors. Thus, the Hon'ble Committee under the orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court has already seized the matter in question. Therefore, to continue with the present complaint will be a futile exercise. Thus interference by this Forum in the manner of recovery of amount as well as refund of the amount to the investors shall not advance the cause of justice rather it will be a misuse of process of law.

8. In these premises, we are of the opinion that this Forum is unable to pass an executable order against the opposite parties. Therefore, the present application is accepted. Consequently, we also dispose of the main complaint accordingly. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the Hon'ble Committee to seek his claim. No order as to costs. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record.

Member President Member