ANALYST

LAW ASSOCIATES

Vijay Kr. Aggarwal E- 39 Naraina Vihar New Delhi 110028

(Advocate) Chamber No. 251, Patiala House, New Delhi-1

“48 LIST OF JUDGMENTS FOR CONSUMER COURT ON FIXED DEPOSIT”

SR. TITLE CITATION RELEVANT PARA PAGE

NO. GIST NO.
1. T.S. FINANCE AND 1 (2004) CPJ 1-2
INVESTMENT CO. 503
LTD. V/S ARIF

2. PRAKASH WADHWA IV (2003) CPJ 3-4

V/S CLASSIC GLOBAL 37 (NC)
SECURITIES LTD.

3. ALLIANZ CAPITAL & 1 (2001) CPJ 41 5-5

MANAGEMENT V/S (NC)
B.P. GROVER & ORS.
 Vol. I T.S. FINAN(£ ..u:o INV~I-MEi•, ..:; 1. I.TD. v. ARJF 503
concerned, the appella."lt/compJain¥.t daime-J I (2004) {" >J 503
compensation of Rs. SJX)O/· ~s against which UTTAR.t.NCHAL STATE CONSUMER
the District Forum-11 has llward<?d DISPUTES REDRESSAL. COMMISSION,
compensation of Rs. 2,000/- which included DEHRADUN
token compensation for iOss of ~usines. In our
considered view, the amount of compeftSati'Jn H<»i'ble· Mr. ]ustia K.D. Slulhi, Clulirttlll1l &
1
of Rs . .3,000/- cannot be said to be inadequate. M:.. Luxmi Sin3h, Member
.The amount of compen$ation awarded by the T.S. FINANCE AND INVEsrMfNT CO. LTD.
District Forum-11 is just and prope1· and no -Appellant
\ interference is called for in the <~mount of
I versus
compesation aw:\fded. The District Forum-II
has ~twarded Rs. SOO/- as expenses of litigation. ARJF -Respondent

\ \
This ~tmm•nt·al$o appears to be just ."'tJ'Id proper.
The complainant has claimed Rs. 2,000/- 11s
litigation expenses. lhe appellant has not paid
any amo ..mt toward prosecution of the
complaint case ;,s no Cl)urt fees is chargeable
Appeal No~. ·17 to 24 of 2002 and Misc. Case
No. 25 of 20J2-0ecided on 12.12.2003
ConswnerProtectionAct, 1986-Section .
15 -'-· Fin a n('fal Servic.es - Deposits -
Maturity aa._ount not paid -- Matter pending

\\ on the corr.plaint ~tnd no process fee is charged

from the complainant for issuing the process.
Even the Counsel forthecom?lainant/anxillant
in Company Law Board- Dispate can be
decided by Board -Order allowing complaint
shall remain in .abeyance -- Consumers can
I h~ts not issued ;.ny certificate regarding the fees
raise gnevar.ce before Company Law Board.
realised by him from the complainant.
\ Result<tntly, the appeal Jacks merit and is
(Para 2)

\ dismissed ·subject to the appellant being Result : Appeal disposed of.

c:!~~t~~ ~:~i;:.~~~J:::.1rn_--~~;:~---~~ ClltrtfttrMI

l (2001} CPN1 NC:. (~am 2/
"~"'"'''•:;hn11

\
pl'rtie:; /fU ... , AI 1 _•••· it so, adv
bear their own costs o! appeal.
T!Je Counsels fo1· the Parties :
Cor ies of,this judgment be suppliec' to the For the AppeU11nt : Mr. Mmoj Kc1hli. Advoatte.
puties free C~f dHu·ges. For the RESpondent : Mr. jll{fnr ~ltiddiqui,
ApPe.al dismissed. Advocate.
ORDER

\
\
Mr. Ju~;tice K.D. Shahi, Chairman~These
are all con."lertec appe<1ls arising out of simiLu
facts. The appeallant, T.S. Finance <tnd
lnve5"tment Co. Ltd. has got certain depos~ts. It
d:d not repay the amount. Thereafter the
consumers tiled the complaints. which were
aUowed .. Again:;t these order:; 1he.pre54!nt
apJ>f;'!~~~re b-~n filed. There wa~ $plication
by_:the~p~llant that' the_ ~a.tte~ is ~ri~ing· --'~~~;

-~~
befo~~_;;npany J.;.aw_Board .md t.~~~~l'!
·.,. ..the~ot be decide&' her"' :·::c~~:· c.i
\ ··. ,·_ ;,..._.

.·•
the~is::~~.filf!(i-whei"t:.:l_:(M$~
s~~~uhJished:tliat ·ti-;t. •:::-::.._ Cl! the
·";:...::6-.!': -<·
1 - .• -;
._.:.._-.:-~
. _~.:¥.:....•
·_ - :":~ .;~:~~­ ··~.~i
.........:...-•

. ...:- .:·:- .. :.:;-? :- ~-~ ~e_-_~;~.~-:--.~~·:

.~ :·r
 504 CONSUMGR PROTIICTION JUUCMDNTS
investors have been included in the schedule l (~004) CPJ 504
prop, ~·od by the Comp~tny Law Board.
UNION TERRITORY CONSUMER
2. Since the matter is JXnding in Company DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSiON
Law Board, it was a1·gued that no complaint CPANDIGARH p ,
bef.:>re the DistriCt Forum shall lie and the m.'ltter
H011 'ble Mrs. Devinderjit Dhatt, Prcsit!ing
can be decided only by the Board. The learned
Member & A:f•i· Gen. S.P. Kapoor,
Counsel for the appellant referred the ruling Membu
reporjed in I (200I)CPJ 41 (NC), Allianz Capital
11nd Maruzgement Seroicts Ud. v. B.P. Crooer P...AMESH MITTAL -Appellant
and Ors., where it nas been he!d that : versus
"The Company Law Board is now seized PUl J]AB SMALL SCALE AND EXPORT
of tl·.e matter.in Jispute.lt "as been stated COF POP...AT!ON & ANR. -Respondents
on behalf of the Con·pany that the
petitioner-Company is adherin£ to the 1
\pp-;!al C;,se No. 3 64 of 2003-Decided on
. c f payment f rame d b y t.h e 24.9.~003
sc h erne I.
Company !.aw Board. Since the ;:ompany Conswner ProtectionAct.l986._ Section
Law Board is seiZed ofl:he mt~tter; we will 15- Housing- Ai.luttedpJQtsurrendercd - ·
not hear the case any futher. The Tatter is. 'Deposited amount refunded after 7 years . -
disposed of finaJly as abovt:. Any Forum directed O.Ps. to pay interest two.
arJOY.V1CO about tton•pi)'Mtnt tu:c:cMinl llhont"ll after a\lb.!tiAOft of rtquJrcu.t
to the sched~e drawn by the Company doc1.1ments tiiJ date of payment - Ord1.1r
L.nw ••u4 ,.n Itt rf!Jitd li:ltfortt the uphe!lllln •PP•••· (I'Hrtt til
CompAny Law Board.-. R'-SuU : Appe11l dismissed.
3. ln ''iEw of 1he above ruling of the CotmseJs for the Parties:
National Commissjon we will not he'lr the
matter. The judgment and order of the Distr;ct For the Appe:Iant: Mr. AnmKrimar, A.ii'lll':ll•.

I
Forum shaH remain in~o abeyance and t!le Fo:- the Respondents : Mr. Somc:sh Cl.pt<~.
consumers car raise their dispute before th~ AdiXKtll~.
COili\pAny Lftw ht.rct. Oltt),P
ORDER Maj. Gen. S.P. Kapoor, Member-This
~·
This appeal is disposed of accordingly is an appeal against the order of District
with this direction that instead of approaching Cunsamer.Disputes .Redressal Forum-!, U.T., f
the DistriCt Forum fpr executior, and realization Chandigarh (fur short.herdiWter. to be refereed ••
the complainants' should approach the. as Di~rict Forum-I] date 65~ in Con1plai.nt
Company Law Board for payment. Copy of the CaSP l''o. 136 of 2001; 'Rami!Sh Miltal \'. Pw1jt1l• .
judgment shall be placed in the records of each Small~ ::ale lndstries aud Er,Jor(Corportllicn Li1iutaf
· case. Cost of the afpeal shali be easy. [ Anr.
Appe1/ disposed of..

.:·:·.

i
 -~--...--------------
...
///

62 .. •
twll~ ~ llftUIUftll &.'rD•. .'· ,~ .~_.,),~~~. •: ; ·t ~
thf Coinpany .Law Boud unciu ~ Ql\·
of tht J\81 A~ or hid noc ncolvccl any. ' 'ij,~ •'
.f.·. " ~­
~,
fro.~ the· Company Law Board ~!the · j
pro;eedings initiated by any other depositor or
had not participated in tile proceedings bfi,fore
: the Co~pany Law Board, he will be ~titleCl to
:file a complaint before the Consumer. fo~m
'urider the Consumer Protection Aot~ 1!186.
'Aliianz Cnpittzl at1d Managunen~ _Sennas 'Ll,tl. •$
-~ ~ lsupra) wz.s, distinguished. ·lf!a.~~t
·:-
nte·rrerei1l~l.ll'4:"/:•-
.~f¥:~ .C.Omplainant is main~~Jle~
~ :p~dowitlrthe exectitiol'\piocid~oln
ew of said atfidt~vit and ratip ~·Uyod Fimil~a
\ d;'s c~ (supra) above and;ordet"S da~ed
e·
11.2001 which were alfumed. by the order
.~ted 14.12.2001 deserves ~.,be-set a5ide ~g
~egally erroneous. - · ~

- -·- ;..- , .....

._
• ~.

... ..:··
_
.··-
 I • •

--~
·:~o...
,I.. .:,,•_

. . . .... 'i
.·. . • ··I . I
· .. .. . CONSUMiiR PROTECTIOJ':IJJIJ ~5. _ .
,~-; . ··--··· ~t. ·deposit~d.
by them, _wi~h t~~ ·_·,_suP,~-·~· '~~~~~h~d:··~ ~ co.mJ:•liiiifl
·':'.-: ~~~p.~nd~I?-tf.f:.PP~~~~~W ,atongwt~\'~~~~est ~-::T .••CJ~,p~t 1S m_amtatr.able, he
.-.~ •ana ~those we.re:~allowed.ex parte :.wtth.' the procP.ed ith the execullon procedures. In
. :;.4l~~{H~~i? ~e::~:~pond~~t~_t~:P~iJ~~e_d~p~site-J . of.sa~4 af 1davit ~d ratio in Uy:Jd Fina ct 1
11
· '~:=~~¥.i.~·~~~~f:Wl~~~d}~~~!amount~ . ca:~,(~upf") abov~ and orders dated ·17
:·:::'!}q!,~g·. paJd,;-.~~;~p~~tl~?ers:·t.o~k ou~ wht_c}i ~.ere affumed· by t~e order
execution· and ·'in~ ex~~~~.~ prpce~~mgs, the 14.1~001 dese.r\'es to be set asJde being
I . respoijdent filed the ccipy. pf_ or9.~r !:d.ated . e.rrone~us.

\ :£~·astern::~,eg1on
1 7-J-2 9.~-~~~i~~~~~~~~t~.f~g,
~encn!·OJ~cut"" wnere..,y
r !YJ~j AbcordinO:ly.., while allowing.
. ~~-' : . · :;,. · · . ·
pa~;,;i:to
· the·in_v~_sici~~Cfit~
· . was orclereci p~opsdi"~.rec
t ·· peF·orum ~tedortden:oceedare
o pr
set ~thldethand
Wl · t! ex.:!OIIii*
to be made as per the scheme fonn~~a e~. <~pplkations in acco.rdaract with Jaw.
Takinl' note of this order as also the ~eas10n m
Allian~ CDpitaland Mlnuzgemeni.Servii:e;;Ud. P.utie~ will appear before the corQad
\'. B.P: ·cr.or)(!r f;t. Ois.~ 1(200i).ePJ4I.(l-IC::fth~ District FOr .un for ci.rection on 30.10.2003.··
. Disti.ict.iForum :-dismi~s~d ·\h"e ~exeb1'tion RetJision Pehtions
.app'l)~~tt~ns by th~ orde.:S d~;t~d ~1.:11.200land ·'
thJs·i:>~~ef:was upheld bj the Sta.te Commissi::m
in 'teniis' of the orde.r Wlder chaU~ge.
IV (2003) C"J 38 .(NC}
3. After admitting revision p<.!titions, NATIONA.~ ,.CONSUMER
notice~· were directed to be issued to ·the
REDRESSAI. COMMISSTON, NE\.\'
respondent and on 2.9.2003,-the respondent wa~
\
proce~d~d ~x pnrtt· as no one was p.reSent. on its. Hon'bl~ Mr. Justice D.P.. Wadhwa,
\ ·'\ behalf. :J1l~. sa~e. d~. :the petitioners ~ej-e ivfr~. R:ajyalllkshmi Rao, Mr.
Taimni .& Mr. Justiet: K.S . . ,...___....._...,
o.rdc_re_cqc? fil~ atfiday1l(s)
-.,.L.. ·~··-' .. .
iridicati.~I( ~Y ha~
• .•
M~.bas
~
1
.i
I •.

r~e~v~;~y ~~g~ 1rcim ;the. C~pan_v law ..

J • • . •

\ BO~--d·_~£~5':~-!:_h!;Y.:p~ty-befo~ ~ <:;o=?f>~Y Grl!LU RAM .

La\~ Board before 'the sdlr..me was "formulated
by"-1: ·FiL:..Sunnt t0 thiS. o.rdci affidavit <i versusof ooe

I
;:-....·.;
L
!'~
the·:,etitioners, -viz, Prakash Wadhwa dated ESCORTS LTD
6.9:.21 !02 has been filed. J1:js affidavit notices that
· ·
the p ·titioner-s neitherreceived any notice from
the C:Jmpany Law 'Boa~d no!" were they p~rty 2132003
-~ beft)r' it before the -scheme was formulated. In
· ·
i ·
Revision Petition No. 2382 of 20()2~-.;.J:)e(ldeO!J

R.P. t io. 739 of 2001, iloyds Finance ~td. v. H(l}(d)--Compensation- Tracto:,...,~-.

Napccna Singh, decided on 50.1.2002 • .this· -Rep!aceme.:1t o!·~ctorciirectedby
.
Consumer Protection Act, 1986

r~ ::~ ~ot .
!·:_.· ~.:'_ ;C<J!llmissior. held that i1 the co;:.?iG!:-.znt had~:·:-9rder mod!i c:C i;1 appea}~
!!l!::C. ?.ny ap.plicati~n -~~re
tile_
·
Co~ffi~:>~!:en~~ ;<fr·~~ ~-.ti~rre ~~~
·w·.Board unaer ?ectJOl1·45Q.J!; ct :::~ ?£!~~-~-1'~: .nu:.perz ::ve :o!- n~_p! yea~
.::;,• ,~~::had not rece.ived O'un· nc:k~ ::cm{.tue.}.~C:cmmltinzo:a..~edto
.
.-;:···,;~!~~~-~:
. ~~( ·.-~~--~~'
.··. · ::":~~~~"_;
-·· ··-....

,.
~~-, . .'?ffipr.r.:· ·LH~-· BClr.rc !·,:;.~ne : ;!: _!;~~~!~~~*-~te·{:.")~~-::: :c. · ·. _ :: · : · · -:
.
~' .• ;
~·.;-~
..•

~ ;, ,~~~~~;~~~~].~:iWf~!-~~~&::~:
~ ~
.-:_::~~~~t.f~,~:~:~:
-@-~~ .1~···:1-!i
~::::
·-~-·
·=~~ ;:!'.,. ·/./"
_:;::~; ·.,::ti_,
.....,.;... . ~- r-.....
............ r -. ......
-:.__ ··'- - ----·-···....._ . . 'l.·:1:W~..,
.. -----···-·- ... ... ~ ...... ~ -- .• - .............
...... "" .... . ......·_:._. .• ·--~~.., .
 ,/

'·----·· · ...
... .._.

ul.l
_,, ""'NU '1\',\ L nm&'U., t·.AN'I'l "· J\ \' Cll:\NU SUAitMA
1

.-o~:~ld t-~ ~ATIO~~~~-~O_N.SUMER

athirH ·: - (2001) Cl'J .U (NC) 112 1) Cl'J 41 (NC)
1 DISPUTES NA IQNA.L CONSUMER DISPUTES,! i
': oF cxtr•• I ' ~:EDRES_~M:.:~OMMISSJON,
.NEW RE REss AL: . C OMMISS
. . .
IONi rNE' w· -ll. ·
.· . ,,·-c.···1<."ratior, '. !)fl.IJ I 0 EL I . , . , ! , ,_. ,· .
,.II.,,
·'' "' ~.
I.,....~"·''''
-pin th·~ tr~~t!llec!
,.. th.,.
·
1
u" .. J/.m 'bk A.! r,/ ·~·_;,-
... S.ulw> c. s,.,,
l're>i<l-.rl;
Mr.-fustic.e£.h Cllmuihry, Mr.-Justice
I""'' '"Mr.'/ liS Jirt.Sul••• c. S<li}l'rcsitlcni/;;
, r.]ustice O.L{Chaudliij;"Mr.Justice~·~i
..!hat lht! djseah f.K. Me.lira,:Mrs. Rajyt~iakflhmi Rae?"& f .. Melzra&Mr.'p.K.Tai~Members ·
rc the 1'" 1"''u _couk Mr. B.K. Tttlmni, Mcmhers IPAL .,CORPORATION, K-\NTI
·lat~;
t w.here the ·_ £f&Jf/t\, ~ MANA.GIMINT_.
-'cuAJrlt.._. H TJ;J£C()Wd1S610NER .
W~4!f 'I . . . I ' -v.-• .,.. . ~·-
\'eSa\'ed the patifr· . :¢US · · versus _._
if> until h.~ could 1. !
l"·n·J'J.J·."'·'Jlhera·. i f..l'. GROVER l:. ORS. --Respondents NO SHARMA -Respondent
theJes~. su;.::1 del.; ! ;t'\·ision Petition Nos. 210-i-2200 of ~ 999- Rc?,·isJ-:>n etition No. 208 of1997-Decided
the CO!::in;; out ' i [)c<ided on 9.11.2000 l.~ 2.; i.20 1
a \'\'~~: life .!-uppr.- 1 Consumer ?rot.ection Act, 1986 -
rwhrcn rlw llosr·i• i s~ction 11-"Jurisdiction", "Company law . . Cons m.er Protection Act, 1986 -
l!li<~l'lillty.l·,.l'll il i li••Jrd"- Company law Board seized ofthe ::,,.,It \.In 14 ( )(d) - .,Housing'"', .,Com pen·
.:.\IJ.m.;n,·~,; on t! l u1Jtl~r reguding scheme of P.JYilll'n( _ qton" -- l\ unicipal Corporation floated a
•hOW•b !i1,• D<.'l'k· Grievance about non-payment can be raised ~•treme for s le of rcsidcnti.UhoU&eS on hire
d th~ s-= ,:;gestio· l•..tore the Company Law Board- Nation.Jl ' P~
chas.e ba 's ...._ House not given within
pon,~<'n: :-:o. 5;; Cornmissi?n held not to hc.u the cas'! anv ' s:t~•ul.lted pe 'od of 18 months·inspite of
Hen ~ i·.• : .•1o. it ;;,alh•·r. • l~··~·m~nt - ~nee complaint .;__ District
., •''' I ; .•. , -Ill •'I ! •~ . i I •II IIIII ;lJIO\.VC the COffiJJiaint .. nd O"'d" ..,
rc.l~,·.. : ·' . .·fl~t~! 11 ;;. ,:11 t: vrtlt'Tl't '"··,·orJingly. ,·,mtmncJ. .
by 'tate Commission .. - • H .. r WuS
I
I<' ,,,t:::·,·n~;)k c l ,,utlSd for the l'arties: · ·
h"\ t:wn - W ether the complainant is
ence
•i<!\\' ··~ :!:.• 11\JI!.
:. : :h~ Petitioner: Mrs. C. Bi!:dm, A,d;:•,;.-,;!t'. · en! :!led to recover1 interest? Ifso, from which
l~~,··l'.iifJ<· · ,'_'~uoJ ? · ·
it~ : . (:;,:r of.~ · ,.;~:t'-1~!Respunc. - cnt:Mr. P.D Gunt·l .;.t~.,.,·at_•
r . , ... '"'" ......
. ;.;,·iJ : We ha considered the contention
; ,:r the Respondent No. 20 : in perse: i o; In!:
; ''. ::;:i:'· .:s, . . CoUll.iel
. and e find men·tm· . u.· There ts.
,... . !':::: \'oE- •• ;:x the Respondent No. 26: In person. :'l?tr:~r:g on the re ord to indicate that the
~.u:u(IJ?alCorporati nhadagreedtodeliverthe
•mr: p.::. :nen~. ORDER
·t··-=i~cus;ion.~ i - Mr.JusticeS~C.St>n~Fr~ident--The ~ss~sJonoftheho withinl8monthsfrom
;;.iii!v on ei•r , LO':'panylawBoardlSnawscizedofthem<uter 1.~ aate. of registrati The.alllptionsof the
or;d~nt No:': j _, c1sput~. It hc;s been st~~cd on belw!t ~f the c_ompl;u~ant were ~ at the officer of the
uclr i; .. ~ ,.~._.': (ornpan) tbat the petttloncr-Col'1::1a:t·: is
~ res
d:;
p~ndi·
1
•~' -•I.."I:J•• ;I :dJ''lenng. •n sch eme o{ payment fr:~merl
• 'O •L.e r ' !:J•,
LurF.~r~tlon~~ to~d v
r, .-~J~s•on \VJthin 18 Dt
()S·
rballythatbewouldg'et
t hs.It has been d 'ed
·n~ationshall'
•

·- (nmn211y La •• Boa d s· by It eCorporation that eru

\,·a~
I . .J

, i. 1..3"
J:lf. ·-T-.' .h r . mce the Cum_i my - ,. . assurance,asalleged
~ ~-~-n~
• in . . Board JS seued of the matter, we \\'Ill not gwen to the camp ·nantln the facts ___ _;
• •,.·~i<s
. ' c.. . .. ~~a:tnea.seany
• L. th ....-:
•i.U er. 1ne mntt-!ds dis!)O'cd
r t ances 0 f th_e case \\'eareoftheopinian ..ui.U

·,. ~-·: ]i~b : · d iiniillY as above-. Any grit.-vancc aboui n~n·

11
• ".' u4.': w:o.
1...;. l)ll t c . .
1
h ,. · _· ··J\~t<K\:l>r~.mJ
:.
... totheschc....:!td~dr•.... w·to·
t..<~t ••_n~ CorporatJOn sh~uld have delivered
· - ~_·aonoftheh ousewit ina~of2yea...,,
\'th""
filS<

-r:iihhe . ~- i. \·,'l!llf'~'Y L1w L~ll C.l:l '->(.' r.1ist.od l.x·ierc.• r:u_. !;orr uu: a:e·(){ registt . n._ln this-Case, the
. ;:, . • . . ... d ,_......... •..
' . i lla,,.. : ." llll:'-~ny u.w lh>arJ. .'. . ~:: :rauon was effCctecl on. 9_ih.Mav, 1. 99J and
. IS ~ISii>Os.o,!. ~· "l'Do"} course the
., - :. 'i
!- •' • .
. Ordered ucc:naingly. •
. ..
· •·
t::.'t.r. !eJIY.ert.-d
. .. sbo··u
· "·· '·.·it
on 1.6.1993. · ha~
wu a-·--:r·
'I•
UAl

:di~pr·s_~.~.r~ ';_,:.
I •.
----
ue:•
. ,.
.
o!T£'
d
on
~ . 14.11.1994.
. _ -- ·
.
oie., t'ne
•

=t: : :='~m~:!;f~lu.~.~- -~:-:~...·=. =· :;. . . : ;:" " '=~·.;~ ;: , =~=::::~:--·---C-vr:t--: idedW~~t::-

"U<U4Y

==· =... ;:, -:amant_;.._;__IS.:._en!·-

-, ,..