Kuldip Kaur Vs PACL CC 440/2016

2.5.2017 Present: Sh. KS Warring counsel for complainant.

Opposite parties exparte.

The complainant has been given ample opportunities to lead her evidence but she failed to conclude her evidence, therefore the evidence of the complainant is closed by order. However, during the arguments the learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the Committee has already been constituted for deciding the fate of PACL cases and therefore, the complainant shall be given the opportunity to approach the said Committee to get the relief in question as per law.

2. The facts of the case are that the complainant availed the services of the opposite parties and invested an amount of Rs. 51,700/- in cash with the opposite parties through installments from 9.10.2010. It is further averred that both the parties agreed that opposite parties will hand over an estimated sum of Rs. 1,15,600/- to the complainant on 5.2.2016. In view of this the opposite parties issued a policy-cum-registration letter bearing No. U017172061. It is further averred that complainant tried to submit the registration letter cum policy in the office of opposite party No. 1 for the release of amount of Rs. 51,700/- but they refused to accept the policy and payment is not made till date. Hence the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.-

1) The opposite parties may be directed to make the payment of Rs. 51,700/- alongwith interest.

2) To pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for harassment.

3) To pay Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expenses.

3. Upon notice of this complaint initially one counsel appeared on behalf of opposite parties but later on none appeared on behalf of opposite parties, so both the opposite parties were proceeded against exparte.

4. During the pendency of the present complaint, it has come to the notice of this Forum the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on 2.2.2016 in Civil Appeal No. 13301/2015 titled Subrata Bhattacharya Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India. The Hon'ble Apex Court in para No. 3 observed as.-

“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.”

5. The Hon'ble Apex Court further observed in para No. 7 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. Hon'ble Apex Court further observed in para No. 12 and 13 as.-

“ 12. The amount, which is lying in the bank accounts of the Company and other cash belonging to the Company shall be

Kuldip Kaur Vs PACL CC 440/2016

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 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 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. Moreover, it is specifically mentioned in the ibid judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court that the methodology qua the recovery of amount as well as disbursement to the investors shall be the domain of the Hon'ble Committee. 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, we dispose of the present complaint accordingly. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the Hon'ble Committee to seek her 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