TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (4) TMI 790
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eserve Bank) Directions, 1998 to regulate acceptance of deposits by companies carrying on the business of non-banking financial institutions, in exercise of powers conferred by sections 45J, 45K and 45L of the Act. Respondent-company, namely, Kuber Mutual Benefits Limited, having its registered office at Kuber Bhavan, Begum Bridge Road, Meerut (U.P.) was incorporated on 30-9-1991. The Company is a Non-Banking Financial Company and was bound by the aforesaid Directions of 1998. The company has paid-up capital of Rs. 44.09 lakhs as on 31-3-1998; and was declared as 'NIDHI' Company under section 620A of the Companies Act, 1956 on 18-3-1993, and was exempted from the provisions of sections 45IA, IB and IC of the RBI Act, 1934. It was further denotified from the 'NIDHI' status by the Central Government on 26-3-1999. An inspection was carried out by the Reserve Bank of India in which it was found that the company was not complying with the provisions of Chapter IIIB of the RBI Act and the directions issued by the Bank for companies declared as 'NIDHI' companies. Under section 45IA of the Act, a company cannot carry on the business of non-banking financial activity unless it has a Certifi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....industan Times (English) published from New Delhi and 'Amar Ujala' (Hindi) published from Meerut within a month. The order was carried out and the publication was made by the Bank. On 27-3-2000, Sri Anurag Khanna Advocate stated that he had instructions to appear on behalf of respondent. He was allowed time to file counter-affidavit which was extended on 6-7-2000 and 8-8-2000 but no counter-affidavit was filed. On 26-11-2001, this Court admitted the petitioner for advertisement and directed that the steps be taken for advertisement under rule 24 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 within two weeks. The notices were to be published in the 'Hindustan Times' (English) published from New Delhi and 'Amar Ujala' (Hindi) published from Meerut. The official liquidator, U.P., Allahabad attached to this Court, was appointed as provisional liquidator and was directed to take possession of the assets of the company and to make inventories, therefor, and that an injunction was issued restraining respondent-company, its directors, agents or any authority dealing with the assets of the company from transferring, alienating, disposing of or encumbering the property in any manner whatsoever excep....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o know about the pendency of the winding up petition only a few days ago. In paragraph 15 of the application, it has been stated that Reserve Bank of India, in affidavits filed in B.S. Sehgal v. RBI [Writ Petition No. 3944 of 1995], pending before the Delhi High Court, has not disputed that the realizable value of the assets of the company exceed the total liability and thus, the company which is keen and prepared to pay the money shall submit a claim of repayment in a detailed counter-affidavit, after consideration with the Chartered Accountants. The company petition was filed in the year 1999 and that appearance was put on behalf of the Directors in March, 2000. There is absolutely no justification for the respondents to seek further time to file counter-affidavit. The RBI has filed this petition after causing detailed enquiries in the matter and after noticing the fact that the respondents have violated provisions of R.B.I. Act, and is unable to pay its debts. The company has been prohibited from receiving any further deposits and a satisfaction was arrived, that its continuance is detriment to the public interest or the interest of depositors of the company and thus, the comp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....coronary syndrome and has undergone coronary angiography followed by angioplasty on 11-2-2002. He was advised rest for next two weeks and not to travel. On an enquiry whether any steps have been taken to submit the details required by this Court, Sri Anurag Khanna informed the Court that all the employees of the company have left and Sri P.K. Sharma alone is looking after the case. 7. The company petition was instituted on 27-10-1999. With great difficulty, the respondent-company could be served and inspite of three adjournments, the respondent-company has not even filed reply to the petitioner. On 21-1-2002, when this Court secured attendance of Sri P.K. Sharma, it was specifically made clear to him that looking into the interest of race of depositors and in the public interest, he will not be given any further adjournment and that he must bring the entire details and particulars on record in support of his application A-26 dated 21-1-2002. He has failed to avail the opportunity and as such the Court rejected the prayer for adjournment and reserved the orders. 8. In his affidavit dated 21-1-2002, Sri P.K. Sharma has stated that all the directors were in judicial custody from Jun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....istrar General can intimate the jail authorities concerned of that position. 5. We make it clear that it is open to the investigating agency in any case to move for cancellation of bail if any such investigating agency finds that petitioner is misusing the liberty granted by this order." 9. During the pendency of the company petition, several applications have been filed by depositors and employees of the company. The details of these applications are given below :- (1)A-9 on behalf of Sri N.P. Agrawal and 5 others, who were Branch Managers of the respondent-company, for their impleadment. Applicant No. 6 Sukh Pal Gupta claims to customer/depositor, and all the applicants state that they have deposited with respondent-company a sum of Rs. 21 lacs. The affidavit points out discrepancies in the order of CLB as well as in the petition of RBI. (2)A-11 by Kuber Kalyan Samiti and another giving details of deposits in para 4 to the extent of Rs. 1,76,42,85.00. The society appears to have been founded to protect interest of depositors and prays to allow the winding up petition by appointing an official liquidator to take over the assets of the company and prepare its inventory and, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Bench, New Delhi being Application No. 15/199 of 1998 CLB under section 45Q of the Reserve Bank of India Act. The CLB while passing order on 21-12-1999, took into notice the interim order dated 13-8-1998, took into notice the interim order dated 13-8-1998 issued by High Court of Delhi restraining the company from alienating its assets, except in the normal course of business. After hearing the depositors and considering the averments by the respondent-company, which took defence under the interim order issued by Delhi High Court, the CLB framed a scheme, in exercise of suo motu powers vested in CLB, by which respondent-company was directed to make payment under the different schemes of deposits, which had already matured and the deposit which would be maturing in future in phased manner, which is categorised as under :- Categories of deposits Schedule of repayment of the deposits Up to Rs. 5000 Within 3 months from the date of the maturity or the date of order whichever is later. Rs. 5001 to Rs. 10000 In two (2) equal six monthly instalments commencing from the date of maturity or the date of order whichever is later. Rs. 10001 to Rs. 15000 In three (3) equal six monthly ....