PEARLS GREEN FORESTS LTD. vs JYOTI RANI

ON a complaint filed by the respondents, the District Forum, Hisar had ordered the appellant to pay interest on the deposited amount at the rate of 18% per annum and clear the amount in instalments of Rs. 50,000/- per month.

BRIEF facts of the case are, that the amounts to the tune of Rs. one lac each in the names of Jyoti Rani & Mamta and Rs. 50.000/- in the name of Geeta Rani, all minors, were deposited with the appellant-Company under their units scheme. The deposit was made for a period of six years and at the end of the said period an amount of Rs. 2,20,000/- each was payable to Jyoti Rani and Mamta and Rs. 1,10,000/- to Geeta Rani. However, apprehending that the appellant-Company was not making use of the funds in the scheme for which they were taken and also fearing that the amount may not be returned on the due date. Smt. Kamla mother and guardian of the minors filed the complaint before the District Forum for refund of the money immediately. The complaint was not contested by the present appellants and on their assurance that they would make payment @ Rs. 50,000/- per month to clear the invested amount, the District Forum passed the impugned order. In addition to the invested amount the District Forum directed the appellants to pay interest @ 18% per annum. In the appeal before us, the main contention of the appellants is that the complaint could not be filed at Hisar as in the agreement signed for the sale of its units, the investors had accepted that all cases would be triable at Chandigarh only. However, in view of the fact that the appellants had voluntarily submitted themselves to the jurisdiction of Hisar Forum and also the fact that the order was passed on the basis of the offer made by the appellant''s representative before the District Forum, we cannot entertain this contention of the appellants at this stage.

The second point taken by the appellants is that the amount was liable to be paid only on maturity and not before that date. However, it has not been made clear in the appeal as to why an offer was made before the District Forum to make the payment in instalments even before the maturity date. Since the order of the District Forum amounts to a consent decree, we would not like to interfere in this matter. However, when the appeal was filed in May, 1994 a stay order was issued with the result that the order of the District Forum has not so far been implemented. The Units Certificates were issued on 16th September, 1991 and their maturity would also be due on 15th September, 1997. Since that date is also approaching fast, we would like to make it clear that while sustaining the order of the District Forum regarding payment of Rs. 50,000/- per month till the clearance of the payable amount, the appellants should immediately start paying the amount of Rs. 50,000/- per month to the respondents so as to liquidate their commitment regarding the payment of the maturity amount on or before 15th September, 1997. It is clarified that the total amount payable to the respondents would be Rs. 2,20,000/- to Jyoti Rani, Rs. 2,20,000/- to Mamta and Rs. 1,10,000/- to Geeta Rani. Since the appellants are being directed to pay the maturity amount as per the agreement between the parties, there will be no need for them to pay interest @ 18% as directed by the District Forum.

IN the light of the above discussion, the appellants are directed to start paying the amount of maturity value of the respondents @ Rs. 50,000/- per month starting with this month itself and liquidate the whole amount before the date of maturity as stipulated in the agreement. IN case, they do so, they will not be liable to pay any additional interest on the said amounts. However, any delay in the payment of monthly installments for the final clearance of the amount would attract interest @ 18% per annum from the date of default till actual payment in each case. Any failure on the part of the appellants to comply with this order will also attract the provisions of Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act any they would render themselves liable for penal action in case of any default. The appeal is thus partly accepted and the order of the District Forum is modified as above. Appeal partly accepted.