MOTI LAL JAIN Vs. MARUDHAR SERVICES PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Order will dispose of Appeal Nos. 178,309 and 316 of 1993 against the common order dated 29.3.93 of the Delhi State Commission, since the issues involved are common in all these appeals. Briefly the facts are that attracted by an advertisement made by M/s. Marudhar Services Pvt. Ltd., a number of people joined a scheme known as 'Marudhar Farms - The Swati Investment Plan'. M/s. Marudhar Services Pvt. Ltd., a Public Limited Company and Shri Ashok Mehta, Chairman of the said Company are respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in this appeal. Apart from the advertisement in a number of newspapers, the promoters of the scheme also issued brochures titled 'Money grows on trees' offering eight options to such investors who deposit a sum of Rs. 30,000/ - as a participant in the scheme. These options offered returns in the form of cash or cash plus land or cash plus trees or land plus trees depending upon the period for which a participant opts ranging between 6 to 12 years. It was also stated that the scheme provided for the allotment of 4,840 sq. yards of land to a person applying for one unit under the scheme and further that the said plot of land would be developed by the promoters at their expense. The development of the plot included approach roads, water and electricity connections etc. for which the investors were required to pay Rs. 5,000/ -. The main attraction of this scheme was a cotinuing return from the eucalyptus trees which were to be planted by the promoters of the scheme, apart from a permanent asset in the form of a plot or return in the form of a multiple of the amount deposited. The scheme was floated sometime in 1986 and thereafter a number of people applied to join in it and made their deposits with the promoters of the scheme. The promoters had also published in August, 1986 a citation in the newspapers, under the directions of the M.R.T.P., stating that they have acquired 1,000 acres of land at Sohna for the purpose of this scheme. It was envisaged that for the first phase 1,000 units of the Marudhar Farms will be located near Sohna in Gurgaon, Haryana which is only 42 kms. from Delhi on the National Highway No. 8 and is one of the most popular tourist resorts in Haryana by virtue or its scenic beauty and the famous Hot Water Sulphur Springs. Other locations in the same vicinity include Bhallabh Garh, Faridabad and Palwal. What added to the attraction of the scheme was the statement that the concerned area in Sohna falls within an obvious scope of Greater Delhi and the National Capital Region. The promoter of the scheme, Mr. Ashok Mehta, was described in the advertisement as a finance wizard, philanthropist at heart, a man with unusual concern for environment, with zeal and initiative to each out into areas where no one ever ventured.

(2.) THE promoters allotted units to the depositors in Risabh Park in Marudhar Farms at Sohna in October, 1986. However, in August, 1987 the participants in the scheme were informed by the Marudhar Services Ltd. that the plantation site has been changed from Sohna to another area, namely, Atwa, near Palwal because of some problems in regard to allotment of land at Sohna. In this letter dated 19th August, 1987 sent to all investors the Management of the Marudhar Services took a unilateral decision in regard to the change of the site from Sohna in Gurgaon to Atwa in Palwal and indicated some changes in regard to the countdown period of the scheme 'the Swati Investment Plan'. This letter concluded by stating that 'this letter should be taken to have amended the concerned clause of the agreement where applicable. It may also be mentioned here that modalities in connection with plantation have already commenced at our new plantation site'.

(3.) WE have gone through the records of this case and heard the learned Counsel for the appellants as well as the respondents. A fact which emerges from the perusal of the record is that none of the complainants has so far been given possession of the land. The contention of the respondents is that they are willing to give possession of the land units alongwith trees at Atwa, but the complainants are not willing to take it. It is quite clear that the land at Atwa is not of the same quality as at Sohna near Gurgaon, both on the grounds of location as well as its value. Moreover, the expectation of having a recurring income from the plantation of eucalyptus trees has turned into frustration. It does not stand to commonsense and reason that the investors would not accept a piece of land of the same size for which they had opted alongwith the trees which may provide much more than the amount they had initially deposited. It is true that in their complaint, the complainants have used the word fraud at one place in respect of the breach of agreement. However, just because the word fraud is mentioned as one of the grounds of the complaint, it should not be thrown overboard without taking into account the totality of the circumstances of the case.