MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA Vs. MODERN THREADS INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) BEING aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgement and order dated 17.2.2006 passed in Appeal No.149/01 by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan rejecting the claim of the complainant for payment of interest on the fixed deposits, the complainant has preferred this revision petition. As the amount was not paid, complaint was required to file Complaint No.1216/1998 before the District Forum, Jaipur-2. That complaint was dismissed on 25.10.2000.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that as the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) proceedings are pending qua the respondent, this complaint was not maintainable. As against this, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has produced on record a letter dated 7.3.2003 written by the Bench Officer of the BIFR which refers to the decision rendered by the High Court of Karnataka in "Deepak Insulated Cable Corporation Ltd. V/s. Union of India and others (2001) Company KAR 401)," wherein it was held that a deposit made in the sick company is not a sum lent to the company but a sum held in trust by the company till the time of the maturity. The BIFR further informed the complainant that any claim made for return of the deposit with the company cannot be termed as a suit for recovery of money, attracting Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 and that the protection of the said provision is not available to the sick company against the fixed deposits.