NATIONAL INVESTORS FORUM Vs. GOLDEN FORESTS (INDIA) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M /s Golden Forests (India) Limited is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 (for short the Act) on 23.2.1987. The company was given certificate for commencement of business under Section 149(3) of the Act.

(2.) THE company announced some beneficial deposit schemes ensuring highest returns to its investors, creditors or consumers. The company thus attracted large number of investors and creditors. By the end of close of 7th Financial Year i.e. 1994, the turn over was Rs. 154 crores and by the end of 1997, it achieved the business target of Rs. 1,000 crores. During the course of hearing of the present case, it is admitted by the company that it has 24,65,231 investors who have invested sum of Rs. 980.14 crores principal excluding returns thereon.

(3.) IN response to such petition, company has filed a detailed written statement wherein it has been stated that the company has adequate assets and resources to pay back all its debts. It is further stated that the company has moved an application before Hon'ble Mumbai High Court to remove the receiver and permit the company to hasten the process of repayment of the investors under the supervision of court. It has been stated that the company would welcome the intervention of the Chandigarh High Court in whose supervision the investors may be repaid to prevent any further loss of prestige to the company which is financially viable and investor friendly. It has been mentioned that there was a restraint order from Chief Judicial Magistrate restraining the respondents from operating their lockers, bank accounts till the investigation is over by the Vigilance Department. However, the permanent Lok Adalat at Chandigarh was pleased to order on 20th August, 2001 that there is no bar to operate on the accounts of the respondent's company. It was stated that since the matter is sub-judice before the Mumbai High Court therefore, it cannot be said that the respondent has failed or neglected to pay its creditors or is unable to pay its debts. It is further stated that the problems of the company are transitory in nature. On merits, the company showed its readiness and willingness to pay the amount and dues payable to the investors. However, it is stated that the appointment of liquidator is against the interests of the investors as distress sale of the assets which constitute the security of the investors would yield much lower proceeds. The company sought a consolidated scheme to be filed on repayment to the satisfaction of the court.