SUPREME CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES Vs. RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Original Complaint by the Supreme Chemical Industries, a partnership firm and its three partners is direction against the Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd. Rajasthan Board for Prevention and Control of Pollution, Rajasthan Financial Corporation, State Bank of India and the New Indian Assurance Company Ltd.

(2.) SINCE we are not inclined to try this Original Complaint, we will notice the facts only briefly. The allegation of deficiency in service on the part of the Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd. (for short RIICO) is given in paras 1 to 15 of the complaint. The complaint in nutshell is that RIICQ allotted industrial plot No. G. 1/413, admeasuring 1000 sq. metres for Rs. 50,810/- to the complainants for establishment of their industry and possession delivered on 6.4.88, that RIICO had allotted the said plot near plot Nos. Gl/411 and Gl/412, owned by M/s. Arvind Syntex Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Ajay Overseas Pvt. Ltd., whose Managing Directors are Shri R.K. Sharma and Shri H.R. Sharma, that the single act of RIICO by allotting industrial plot in a place which is being used for residential and commercial purposes and there was misuser of industrial plots by said influencial persons, who were instrumental in getting the plant of the complainants closed, that M/s. Arvind Syntex and M/s. Ajay Overseas were hob-nobbing with all the Government and semi-Government authorities specially RIICO and the Pollution Board and that RIICO did not allot an alternative site to the complainants despite repeated requests. The plea is that if RIICO had allotted the industrial plot either in the corner of the Industrial Estate or in the vicinity of other chemical units, then neither Bhiwadi Manufacturers Association nor M/s. Ajay Overseas nor M/s. Arvind Syntex would have been in a position to make false reports against the complainants. The complainants pray the relief of a direction to RIICO to allot an alternative plot.

(3.) THE details of the defective service on the part of the Rajasthan Financial Corporation (for short RFC) are given in paras 33 to 40 of the complaint. RFC had sanctioned a loan of Rs. 13.98 lakhs on the terms and conditions of the sanction contained in the letter dated 4.1.89. The complaint is that the RFC disbursed the loan of Rs. 11.98 lakhs and Rs. 2 lakhs was retrained illegally under Clause 3 of the schedule. The complainants allege that this clause is harsh, impracticable and unjustified in the eye of law as it was clear cut case of under finance as a result of which the complainants suffered a loss of Rs. 2.40 lakhs. It is further pleaded that RFC did not supply information to the complainants for availing of the facilities of subsidy which was under consideration of the Rajasthan Government and thus the mount f subsidy of Rs. 4,68,750/- was lost and also the complainant suffered a further loss of Rs. 1 lakh on account of mental torture. Unfair trade practice is also alleged against RFC. It is pleaded that RFC issued order of taking over the unit of the complainants without affording an opportunity of effective hearing. It is further pleaded that the complainants were deprived of the natural justice to put up their case before the RFC and all the doors of restarting the industrial unit were closed down, that the action on the part of the RFC is the worst step of unfair trade practice, that the complainant had also invested Rs. 11.34 which caused ruination of the whole family and that the complainants are entitled for compensation of Rs. 19.38 lakhs from RFC.