AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THE appellants in F.A. No. 165/2004 are the complainants in S.R. No. 1670/2002 on the file of District Forum-I, Hyderabad.
THE brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant No. 1 deposited a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with the opposite party in fixed deposit on 26.9.1998. THE opposite party undertook to pay interest at 15.53% p.a. and promised to pay a sum of Rs. 58,254/- on the date of maturity i.e., 27.9.1999. THE second complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 3,500/- in fixed deposit on 26.9.1998 for which the opposite party promised to pay interest at 15.91% p.a. as the said deposit was made for a period of 18 months. On the date of maturity, the complainants surrendered the original deposit receipts and got acknowledgements but the opposite party failed to refund the amount, hence the complaint. The District Forum at the admission stage held that the Company Law Board has ceased the matter and any grievance about non-payment, according to the schedule, can be raised before the Company Law Board. Thereafter the opposite party became a sick industrial undertaking. The District Forum relying on the decision given by the Apex Court in Rishbh Agro Industries Ltd. v. P.B.N. Capital Services Ltd., reported in IV (2000) SLT 717=2000 (4) ALD 85 (SC), held that : "Section 15 provides that when an industrial company becomes a sick industrial company as defined under Section 2(o) of the Act, the Board of Directors of the Company, shall within 60 days from the date of finalization of the duly audited accounts of the company for the financial year make a reference to the Board of determination of the measures which shall be adopted with respect of company. Section 16 obliges the Board to make such inquiry as it may deem fit for determining whether any industrial company in accordance with the procedure prescribed therein. It follows, therefore, that from the date of submission of reference under Section 15 an inquiry shall be deemed to have been commenced for the purpose of Section 22 of the Act."
and the District Forum has dismissed the complaint with a direction to approach the Company Law Board.
Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant preferred this appeal.
AT the appellate stage a memo was filed by the Assistant Official Liquidator stating that in pursuance of the orders of Hon''ble High Court, an Official Liquidator has taken over charge of the assets and liabilities of the respondent company. Since the assets and liabilities are in the custody of the Official Liquidator, we modify the order of the District Forum and direct the appellants/complainants to approach the Official Liquidator and seek redressal. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. Appeal disposed of.