MODERN THREADS INDIA LTD Vs. B K SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the above mentioned appeals, filed by the appellant named above, under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') have common facts and also raise common questions for consideration, the same, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the appellant and the respondents/authorised representatives of the respondents/learned Counsel for the respondents, have been heard together and are being disposed of finally by this common order.

(2.) The facts, relevant for the disposal of the above mentioned appeals, briefly stated, are that the appellant is a Company duly incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at A-4, Vijaypath, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, and a Branch Office at 709-Ansal Bhawan, 16-Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi. In all the above mentioned appeals, the respondents had made deposited with the appellant. The deposits, so made by the respondents, with the appellant were to carry interest at the agreed rate and after the date of maturity, the same were payable by the appellant to the respondents together with interest. In some of the cases, the appellant had even issued post-dated cheques in advance towards the repayment but the same on presentation were not honoured. Since the appellant failed to pay the amount of deposits together with agreed rate of interest to the respondents, the respondents filed separate complaints against the appellant before the District Forum, under Sec.12 of the Act with the prayer that the appellant be directed to refund the amount of deposits together with interest, compensation and costs.

(3.) The claim of the respondents, before the District Forum, was contested by the appellant, who filed written reply/written version. In the reply/written version, filed on behalf of the appellant, while admitting the deposits made by the respondents, it was stated that the District Forum had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaints and the Company Law Board vide order dated 29.12.1997, had already approved a scheme for repayment to the creditors including the respondents. It was stated in the reply/written statement that there was no cause of action for the respondents for filing the complaints. It was prayed that the complaints filed by the respondents be dismissed with costs.