DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C. C. CASE NO. 500/2014
Date of Filing: Date of Admission Date of Disposal:
05.09.14 10.09.2014 11.05.2015
PETITIONER = Vs. = O.Ps.
1.Shri Sukumar Kolay, 1.Shri Pramatha Nath Manna,
S/o. Late Mohanta Ram Kolay, Chairman & Managing Director
2B,City Enclave, MPS Greenery Developers Ltd,
28, Diamond Harbour Rd, “MPS Enclave”, P-176, Block-‘B’,
Kolkata-700060. Lake Town, P.S. Lake Town, Kol-89.
2.Shri Santanu Chowdhury,
DirectorMPS Greenery DevelopersLtd
“MPS Enclave”, P-176, Block-‘B’
Lake Town, P.S. Lake Town, Kol-89.
3. Shri Madhusudhan Adhikari,
DirectorMPS Greenery DevelopersLtd
“MPS Enclave”, P-176, Block-‘B’,
Lake Town, P.S. Lake Town, Kol-89.
J U D G E M E N T
The fact of the case, in short, is that the complainant is from middle class poor family. The invested Rs. 11,00,000/- in MPS Greenery Developers Ltd. P-112, Block-‘B, Lake Town, P.S. Lake Town, Kolkata- 700089 by purchasing 3 nos. of their bonds (named as “Orchard Bond”) of Monthly Income Scheme. Out of those, 2 nos. were purchased by the complainant jointly with his wife Smt. Mandira Kolay and 1 nos. was with his son Shri Suvajit Kolay.
The complainant further stated that as per payment terms of those bonds the complainant was getting regular interest of total Rs. 10,450/- in every month through NEFT. At the end of September, 2014 the amount of invested money and its relevant interests become Rs. 11,00,000/- +Rs. 1,14,950/- = Rs. 12,14,950/- . Since November, 2014 the management of MPS Greenery Developers Ltd stopped to pay the monthly interests against all the aforesaid three bonds.
Dictated and corrected Contd. …. 2/-
C. C. Case No.-500/2014
- :: 2 :: -
The complainant further stated that since then, mostly in every week the complainants went to the aforesaid office of MPS 2 to 3 times to get the payments. But every time they were refused by the concerned officers of MPS, namely the O.P. Nos. 2 & O.P. No.3.
The complainants also stated that O.P. Nos. 2 & 3 started to blackmail the complainants stating that “Henceforth we cannot pay you any cash, you have to adjust your all dues in every month by investing further money purchasing new Bonds”.
The complainants further stated that on 21.03.14, the management of MPS published one notice in the newspaper “Ananda Bazar Patrika” stating their inability to pay the interests and maturity to their investors for want of required liquid money. The statement of MPS is directly confirming the main complaint of this instant case i.e. “Nonpayment of MIS interest to the complainants”.
The complainant also stated that the attitude of the owner/ management of this company is most suspicious. They not only violated the payment terms of their MIS- Bonds but also expressed their intention in the newspaper not to pay even the Maturity money. Thus, they proved themselves as most unreliable, treacherous & cheater. However, all the invested money of the complainants has been proved to be most unsafe at their custody.
The complainants further stated that at the end of September, 2014 the amount of invested money and their relevant interests become as follows:-
Invested money Rs. 11,00,000/- Total
Interest money Rs. 1,14,950/-
(with compensation of Rs. 50,000/-) Rs. 12,64,950/-
The complainants also stated that mostly in every week the complainants went to the office of MPS ( O.P. Nos. 2 & 3) times with an intention to get the payments of their MIS interests but O.P. Nos. 2 & 3 in capricious manner avoided the complainants and the complainants are now passing their days with a panic and lastly on 06.06.14 the complainants again went to the office of O.Ps, but the O.Ps refused to pay any amount. Hence the complaint.
The O.Ps have contested the case by way of filing written version.
The O.Ps stated that by order dated 31.12.12, 24.01.13, 23.03.13, 26.03.13, 23.04.13, 25.04.13, 26.04.13 office at the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circel-2, Midnapore Sahoo Bhawan, Kshudiram Nagar, Paschim Midnapore, Pin- 721101, has already attached the Bank account of the present O.Ps.
Dictated and corrected Contd. …. 3/-
C. C. Case No.-500/2014
- :: 3 :: -
The O.Ps further stated that under consideration of the O.Ps’ letter dated 19.05.14 order No. RO/003/2014 (Recovery Certificate No. 20 of 2013) dated 6th June, 2014, the Recovery Officer of Securities & Exchange Board of India under Rule 16 & 48 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act 1961, read with Section 28A of the SEBI Act, 1992 has prohibited the O.Ps from disposing, transferring, alienating, changing in respect of all the immovable properties held by the O.Ps which are mentioned in the annexure-1 of the order thereof and also prohibited all other moveable properties held by the O.Ps except the Bank Account as permitted by the Hon’ble High Court of Kolkata vide order dated 19.12.13.
The O.Ps also stated that they have (Recovery Officer of SEBI) further directed that all persons are prohibited from taking any benefits under such transfer disposal alienation or change in respect of the properties mentioned in the annexure-1.
The O.Ps further stated that the Recovery Officer has attached the shares held by the promoters in its group companies vide orders dated January 8 & 9 of 2014.
The O.Ps also stated that the Recovery Officer had also attached and recovered an amount of Rs. 2,00,46,000/- which is due to be paid by West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd to the O.Ps.
The O.Ps further stated that all the relevant papers and documents are in the custody of the Income Tax Department and Securities and Exchange Board of India for which it would not be possible feasible and practicable for the present O.Ps to make scrutiny of the documents of the complainant and to file the written version thereof, unless and until the Income Tax Department and Securities and Exchange Board of India have been made parties to the present proceeding. Hence they prayed for dismissal of the case.
Point for Decision:-
Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons
The complainants have submitted affidavit-in-chief in support of their contentions in the complaint. O.Ps did not file affidavit-in-chief. Complainants submitted the documents in support of their claim.
Dictated and corrected Contd. …. 4/-
C. C. Case No.-500/2014
- :: 4 :: -
Ld. Lawyer for the complainant pointed out from the letter No.ERO/RKP/OW/M-5471/2014 dated 30.06.14 contained in the documents submitted by the O.Ps to the Ld. Court on 22.04.15. which this letter written by SEBI directed MPS to Repay all the Investors within one month, i.e. within January, 2012. But MPS did not care that order of SEBI. Therefore, SEBI initiated Recovery Proceedings.
(b) Page No.30, Para 3 -In the aforesaid Recovery Proceedings SEBI directed MPS to pay an amount of Rs. 1,520/- Crore collected by them along with Returns to the Investors, Interests, Cost expenses, etc. but MPS willfully neglected to comply with the same, even though MPS had sufficient resources to pay the dues.
© Page No.31, Para 4- MPS intended to surrender their assets to SEBI and advised SEBI to Repay the Investors on behalf of them. In this regard SEBI clearly indicated that “the responsibility to Repay the Investors with returns depends fully on MPS and not on SEBI or anybody else”
(d) Page No.31, Para 5- SEBI further clarified that, in the Recovery Proceedings-
(i) the Recovery officer has prohibited MPS from transferring their properties or creating encumbrances on the properties.
(ii) the properties of MPS are still under the Ownership, Possession and Control of MPS. MPS neither handed over their properties to SEBI nor SEBI taken over the same.
(iii) Liquidation of the Assets for Repayment to the Investors has to be carried out by MPS.
(iv) SEBI shall accord prior permission to MPS for selling the properties on an Asset to Asset basis on submission of necessary details.
(e) Page No. 31, Para 6- SEBI intimated MPS that, “ there is no apparent impediment for MPS in liquidating the Assets and paying the Investors in accordance with CIS Regulations.
(f) Page No.32, Para 7- SEBI further directed MPS to submit a roadmap for liquidating their Assets and Repaying the Investors within two weeks from the date of receipt of this letter dated 30.06.14. But MPS did not submit any such proposal as on date (even after lapse of 11 months).
In view of all above, it is clear evident that MPS has been trying to abdicate themselves from the statutory obligation and responsibility to Repay the complainants’ deposited money along with interests, cost expenses, penalty, etc. and also attempting to misguide the Ld. Court taking the name of SEBI.
From the petition of the O.Ps, it appears they are admitted that O.Ps failed to pay the claim of the complainant.
Dictated and corrected Contd. …. 5/-
C. C. Case No.-500/2014
- :: 5 :: -
We have considered the submission of the Ld. Lawyer of the O.Ps but it is a fact that the O.Ps did not deny the claim of the complainants. So, the complainants are entitled to get relief as prayed for. This Forum will not look into what is going between the Income Tax Authority SEBI and the O.Ps.
The complainants have proved their case by cogent evidence and complainants are entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
In the result, the case succeeds against the O.Ps with a cost.
Hence
Ordered,
that the case be and the same is allowed against the O.Ps with cost.
The O.Ps are directed to pay the maturity values of individual bond together with interest @ 12% per annum for the overdue period to the individual complainant within three months from the date of this order.
OPs are also directed to pay compensation of Rs 10, 000/- and Rs 5,000/- as litigation cost to the complainants within two months from the date of this order, failing which OPs shall have to pay sum of Rs 100/- per days from the date of this order till it realization, as punitive damages, which shall be deposited by the OPs in this State Consumer Welfare Fund.
Let copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.
Member Member President
Dictated & Corrected by me.
