Surinder Kaur Vs PACL CC 1306/2015
15.3.2016 Present:Sh. Dhiraj Kumar counsel for complainant.
Sh. Rajneesh Kumar Bansal counsel for opposite parties.
This order shall dispose of an application moved by opposite parties for dismissing the complaint in view of the order dated 2.2.2016 passed in Civil Appeal No. 13301/2015 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
2. In the application the opposite parties have submitted 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 type of matters. In the last para it is prayed that in view of the above said order present complaint may kindly be dismissed being not maintainable.
3. In reply to this application, complainant has denied the contents of para No. 2. It is further submitted that opposite parties have wrongly interpreted the Orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and present complaint is not barred by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Further, in this order nothing is mentioned about the maintainability or non maintainability of the present complaint before this Forum. Further, no direction is given of any kind by the Hon'ble Court to this Forum. It is further submitted that the complainant was not a party in the said order so the present application of the opposite parties is not maintainable at this stage. In last it is prayed that the present application may kindly be dismissed with cost.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
5. We have carefully perused the order dated 2.2.2016 in Civil Appeal No. 13301/15 titled Subrata Bhattacharya Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In this order the Hon'ble Supreme Court given a clear cut direction to the opposite parties/company not to collect any further amount from any of the investors. Further in para No. 3 it is mentioned that.-
“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.”
6. Further, it is also mentioned in para No. 7 of this order that.-
“ 7.The methodology with regard to recovery of amountby sale of the land and disbursement of the amount to the investors shall be overseen by the Members of the Committee.”
7. The Hon'ble Apex Court further mentioned in para No. 12 that.-
“ 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.
8. Hon'ble Supreme Court further held in para No. 13 of this order that.-
13. The decision with regard to sale of property of the Company by the Committee shall not be interfered with by any Court.”
Surinder Kaur Vs PACL CC 1306/2015
9. In view of the above mentioned order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India it is not disputed that the complainant has filed the present complaint being an investor who has invested her money with the opposite party company i.e. PACL Ltd.. But in view of this order we cannot direct the company/opposite parties to pay to the complainant/investor the amount so deposited by her with the company because the Hon'ble Supreme Court has directed to constitute a committee who will refund the amount to the investors after getting the sale proceeds from the property of the company. Therefore, the Hon'ble Committee under the orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court has already seized the matter in question. Hence, no purpose will be served to continue with the present complaint.
9. In these circumstances, we are of the view that this Forum is unable to pass an executable order against the opposite parties. Therefore, this application is allowed and the present complaint is dispose of accordingly. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the Hon'ble Committee to seek her claim. No order as to cost. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record.
Member Member
