S.M. FINANCE LIMITED vs VEENA SAWANNI

SMT. Veena Sawanni deposited a sum of Rs. 15,000/- with M/s. S.M. Finance Limited on 6.11.1996 for a period of 12 months and interest @ 15% p.a. was payable on maturity of the F.D.R. On 8.11.1997 it was submitted to the aforesaid Finance Company but no payment was made. On a complaint instituted by the depositor, the District Forum-I ordered on 7.10.1998 that a sum of Rs. 15,000/- together with interest @ 15% with costs Rs. 1,000/- shall be payable. Aggrieved against it, the present appeal has been attempted.

THE appellant did not appear in the Forum despite statutory notice and the proceedings were ordered ex parte. In this case, the deposit made by the respondent and liability of the appellant has not been controverted. THE plea raised is that some depositor had approached the Company Law Board, Southern Region Bench at Chennai and a scheme was formulated to refund the deposits by instalments. On our enquiry, the learned Counsel for the appellant could not give any information as to whether any part of the deposit has been refunded to the respondent or not. THE respondent was not a party to the proceedings held at Chennai. In Ravi Kant & Anr. v. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission & Ors., I (1997) CPJ 271 (DB), it has been observed by Delhi High Court that the depositors in various Companies were entitled for hearing and relief in the FORA and the Commission. THE conclusion is that the appeal fails and it is hereby dismissed. Connected Appeal No. 28 of 1999 has rightly been opposed by Smt. Kamal Gupta, respondent and it also stands dismissed. Appeal dismissed.