Spending
Shocking! Unitech depositors asked to pursue other remedies by Tribunal
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), the new avatar of Company Law Board (CLB), while dismissing petition filed by Unitech Ltd, has asked "depositors to pursue their remedies as per the law". The NCLT also suggested the concerned Registrar of Companies (RoC) to take appropriate action against the company under section 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. Action under this section includes fine of at least Rs1 crore (maximum Rs10 crore) and imprisonment for up to seven years for company official or a fine between Rs25 lakh to Rs2 crore. However, as per section 47 of the Company Law Board Regulations, 1991, the Bench is deemed as a Court or lawful authority for prosecution or punishment of a person who wilfully disobeys any direction or order of such Bench. Therefore, the question here is why the Bench did not use its powers to act against Unitech.
 
In an order on 4 July 2016, BSV Prakash Kumar, Member (Judicial) of the NCLT said, "When this petitioner company could not repay Rs30 crore of money in the time given by this Bench as asked by the company on 11 January 2016, it could not be possible for the company to clear Rs550 crore dues payable to the depositors in near future."
 
"Seeing the developments so far taken place in this case, this Bench is of the opinion that this company could not be in a position to repay the depositors even if further time is extended; therefore this Bench, for having the company defaulted complying with the order dated 11 March 2016, dismissed the petition (CP (T) 10/18/2015) leaving it open to the depositors to pursue their remedies as per law. Accordingly, this Bench hereby suggests RoC concerned to take appropriate action against the company u/s 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013," the Bench added.
 
Earlier on 11 March 2016, the NCLT had passed an order directing Unitech to repay Rs30 crore of depositor's money on or before 30 June 2016 in three instalments. The company's managing director (MD) had given an undertaking through an affidavit, to repay Rs30 crore between 1st February to 30 September 2016 to depositors who have invested up to Rs25,000, Rs50,000 and Rs1 lakh and whose deposits have matured up to 31 March 2016 as per the original date of maturity. However, the Bench did not agree with the proposal.
 
The MD of Unitech then filed another affidavit on 11 March 2016 undertaking to repay Rs30 crore in three monthly instalments till 30 June 2016. But Unitech did not pay any money.
 
Since 14 May 2015, the Bench said, it has given several adjournments in this matter hoping that the company wold repay money to the depositors at least as per the undertaking given by the company. "But, till date, no undertaking has been complied with. In the past, this Bench even appointed a Sale Committee on 15 July 2015 to generate funds by selling the properties of the company, but no progress has taken place in selling the properties of the company," the Bench noted.
 
It then dismissed the petition filed by Unitech and asked depositors to pursue other legal remedies to recover their invested money. The Bench also suggested the RoC to take appropriate action against Unitech under section 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. 
 
Here is what section 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 says...
 
Section 74- Repayment of deposits, etc., accepted before commencement of this Act. 
(3) If a company fails to repay the deposit or part thereof or any interest thereon within the time specified in sub-section (1) or such further time as may be allowed by the Tribunal under sub-section (2), the company shall, in addition to the payment of the amount of deposit or part thereof and the interest due, be punishable with fine which shall not be less than Rs1 crore rupees but which may extend to Rs10 crore and every officer of the company, who is in default, shall be punishable with imprisonment, which may extend to seven years or with fine which shall not be less than Rs25 lakh but which may extend to Rs2 crore, or with both.
 
What depositors of Unitech can do now
As per Section 10F of the Companies Act, any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Company Law Board may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Company Law Board to him on any question of law arising out of such order.
 
Depositors can request the concerned RoC to initiate action against Unitech under section 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.

User

COMMENTS

SHIVAJI THE BOSS

3 weeks ago

Invest in a bank fd only..the hard lesson I learnt. In India people are meant to be cheated.

Sriram Ranganathan

5 months ago

We all know how the Directors & officers of MICRO TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, Mahape, Navi Mumbai quickly latched on to a winding up petition filed by Bank of New York Mellon and ensured that the company was wound up quickly. The only small solace left is the company is now to be investigated by the SFIO. All companies are following this beaten track of voluntary or compulsory winding up and taking the "patli gali" route to cheat the depositors and other small lenders. This should STOP and that is possible only if the courts get proactive and first refer these cases to an investigation by EOW / SFIO with a stipulated time frame for completing the investigation first. There are lawyers and other sharks who facilitate the company directors for a fat fee in this process and this also needs to be plugged at the earliest possible.

Sriram Ranganathan

5 months ago

Look at the manner in which one CLB member (now NCLT member) has connived with Unitech Limited and helped them buy time for over 1 year and finally the above stated order is passed. He constituted a "Sale Committee" for the land and ensured that the members of that Committee are paid "fees" and this included a former CLB Chairman. Finally Sale Committee says no sale of land is possible. Does it take >1 year to figure this out? Open connivance and corruption. This needs to be investigated by going through the "sham" orders passed by this member of CLB hearing after hearing. If B K Bansal had not got caught, Elder Pharma too would have taken a similar route. All this is happening under the very nose of the various investigating agencies. Sad state of affairs! Atleast Anuj Saxena of Elder Pharma should be brought to book and monies realised from the assets of the actor and of the company and this needs to be done quickly!!

Dipakkumar J Shah

7 months ago

My one Application for FDR interest paid late is pending Before Company law Board Northern Region against Jindal Steel & Power Limited. Notice had been served to Company. More than 6 years had been passed but nothing ??? Even all mails ids of MCA officers are given on web of MCA are not working at all. Disc Data is full always bounce back.They do not have time to see our mails and disposs of the same. How much Disc Data is given not known? Like Mr ... recent case , like they must be using for taking money from Company nothing else. They might use e mail id for this purpose. In the name of corruption this is going on. There are more Black Money in Offices , Officers of MCA. See the case of M A Kuvadia. When he caught in Ahmedabad as OL in Calico Mills case , he had beennot removed from the post but, I think and belive that he had been promoted to!!!!!

din.neer

7 months ago

The controlling authorities in India are weak and fragile. There is no government body that can assure you that you wont be cheated by any company or individual, and if so, severe consequences will follow. The NCLT has surrendered in a way. I had uploaded the "Investor Complaint Form" on the website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, but all went in vain. There is no action, neither any response on the issue lodged. I don't know whether approaching consumer court will work in this case or not. All the companies are looting the consumers: Unitech, Pearl, Sahara, JayPee, .... Some people say that this had happened due to a certain change in government rules of accepting deposits, which has barred some non-rating companies from taking deposits. If this is the case, government should ensure before making such rules that deposits of millions of investors don't get sunk.

Dipakkumar J Shah

7 months ago

Governemnt should Inquire about Ethical, Moral Standards, Jurisprudence, Law Iquity and Justice Calibre of the Judge who gave Judgement in this case????? It is need oif the hour when we talked about Corruption. Corruption I mean, my own dictionary meaning "Not to take any actoin amounts to corruption. I have doubts about any reasoning giving verdict against depositors. The word It self is self explanatory?? God save us from all these.I have one experience of Justice Mukhopadhyay in Gujarat High Court ??!!! If he has given the Judgment without any reasoning. Proper inquiry should be made by Government immediately.This also reminds my own case in 58 A with C L B Norther Region against Jindal Steel And Power Limited. Notice is served to the company. Company has never filed reply to petition. No Judgment for last more than 5 to 6 years by C L B Northern Region.??

Ashok Sachdeva

7 months ago

Forget this Bajaj Capital and others. They are hand in gloves with unitech. The only remedy is file claim now. I am doing this for and on behalf of fd holders, here in Delhi. Pl. get in touch. 9953850777 and my postal address is C4H/79 Janak Puri New Delhi [email protected]

tani49

7 months ago

I am also a party to defaulted company's who has not paid my maturity amount since July 2014 and Bajaj Capital is asking on Rs 100 special power of attorney,which seems to me that it is waste of time,The companies are M/SPlethico Pharma and Elder Pharma,I do not know where should I approach.It is better that all should make a Club and collectively fight with the defaulted company. One has to take a lead,I can join as a member.

tani49

7 months ago

I am also a party to defaulted company's who has not paid my maturity amount since July 2014 and Bajaj Capital is asking on Rs 100 special power of attorney,which seems to me that it is waste of time,The companies are M/SPlethico Pharma and Elder Pharma,I do not know where should I approach.It is better that all should make a Club and collectively fight with the defaulted company. One has to take a lead,I can join as a member.

Jagdish Gulrajani

8 months ago

What options investor has now?

REPLY

Ashok Sachdeva

In Reply to Jagdish Gulrajani 8 months ago

Sir, as i explained in previous post, the only option with fd holder is to file claim in NCLT DELHI u/73(4) of the Act, including damages as described in earlier post. ROC action is a criminal proceeding in parallel to this civil proceeding. Rest of all actions are foul play. In fact unitech and bajaj capital have intruded all groups to mislead fd holders to gain time and to put holders on wrong path. The only system in our country is to file claim and if payer defy further, proceed for decree order and get all bank accounts and assets freezed . There is your payment within the earliest possible time. A call on anybody expert in law to prove me wrong. But expert not these laymen or misleaders. You do that by yourself, through advocate, C.A. , company Secratary or any person you rely. This law permits. Pl. take out copy of my post, show to any expert, if wrong, come on line and declare any punishment to me, i shall comply. My sole purpose is to see you all move on right path and law of land prevails. And misleader should not succeed. Regards Ashok Sachdeva 9953850777 [email protected] C4H/79 Janak Puri New Delhi

Ashok Sachdeva

8 months ago

Dear all
I was personally present there in court and attended many proceedings.
A person said here in one post that depositor may invoke OTHER remedy is wrong and misleading. In fact the order suggest THEIR remedies against OTHER remedy.
The only remedy is filing their claim along with damages as incurred by depositor, which includes legal cost too, is section 73(4) of the Act and the only competent court is NCLT DELHI. Any suggestion to approach High Court is also misleading. In fact Appellate Court is NCLAT.
Any group of depositors initiating other action shall waste its time, energy and money. Ultimately the jurisdiction of this Court. Any claim elsewhere shall ultimately be transffered to this court. Same thing has happened in past also when High Court transffered the case to CLB.
Further a call from Bajaj Capital for asking authority on 100 rs paper is also misleading. Bajaj Capital is hand in gloves with unitech. Ethically also it can not file a case against its valued client.
Fd holders has made deposits within the provisions of Act. Certainly they will claim their repayment within the scope of that Act only i.e. section 73(4). Please do not waste your time and file claims.
Me is Ashok Sachdeva General Secratary of Universal Proutist Labour Federation (1027) C4H/79 Janak Puri New Delhi ph. 9953850777
Please note, i am not a fd holder but a volunteer to serve depositors for their rights. My sole purpose is to ensure the rule of law and justice to innocent people. I know most of the investors are aged people, wbich has invested their hard earned retirement benefits in this company to ensure their day to day expenses and to meet urgencies. All are free to get in touch. Advice is free of cost and representation is expenses based . Regards Ashok Sachdeva

Sumon Mukhopadhyay

8 months ago

....as usual the matter will now be taken up in the high court and Unitech Ltd for the time being, is likely to get some respite in paying, immediately.

However, Unitech Ltd could gain from the recent RBI's move to segregate viable and unviable debt.

It has 300 million sq.ft of land bank but it seems it does not want to sell them at distress price; that is why probably why these kinds of things are arising.

However, Unitech Ltd's MD Sanjay Chandra after the Q4FY16 result, said. "The company's focus during the year has been primarily on completing the ongoing projects. Balance expected receipts from these ongoing projects combined are sufficient not only to meet the remaining construction expense but to also to service the debt, if any, against these projects".

‚ÄčTherefore, we can look forward for some positive developments in the coming days, especially when the sector outlook has changed and the NDA government is likely to pursue a loose monetary policy, post, REXIT.

Prashant Gangadhar Tayshete

8 months ago

where is the report of sale committee and hardship committee

REPLY

Nikhil S Girme

In Reply to Prashant Gangadhar Tayshete 8 months ago

The whole system is corrupt, non accountable and Govt is useless ..It has wasted so much of time on developing NCLT and is supposed to have powers like High Court but not acting on it

BSE declares Kassa Finvest as defaulter, asks investors to file claims within 90 days
The BSE has declared Kassa Finvest Pvt Ltd as defaulter, under Rules, Bye-laws and Regulations of the Exchange, for the trading member's failure to settle the claims of the clients. Earlier in May 2015, the Exchange had expelled Kassa Finvest.
 
In a release, BSE also asked investors of Kassa Finvest to file their arbitration references within 90 days. "Investors who have any outstanding claims against Kassa Finvest Pvt Ltd. are advised to file arbitration reference/s with the Exchange, if they so desire, within 90 days from the date of issue of Exchange notice dated 5 July 2016," the bourse said.
 
BSE says, clients filing their claims within 90 days and obtaining arbitration awards in their favour against the trading member, would only be eligible for receiving compensation from the Investor Protection fund (IPF), as per the provisions of the Trust deed and Rules of IPF.
 
The maximum compensation limit per investor, if payable out of Investor Protection Fund under the rules, byelaws and regulations of the Exchange is Rs15 lakh.
 
The claims in respect of the above should be filed with the nearest Regional Centre of BSE, the list of which is available on Exchange's website, the release says.

User

Do your complaints get ignored? 5 ways to ensure faster resolution
A few years ago, I tried to help the promoter of a company who said that his shares were unfairly delisted by the stock exchange. He had sent me a barrage of emails before I got around to taking up the matter. When the article was published, I was astonished to find him erupting in anger and calling it a ‘stupid article’. I had mentioned that he had payment difficulties which he flatly denied. I then went back to his previous emails, painstakingly culled sentences where he had mentioned his payment problems, marked them in bold highlights and sent them back to him. He cooled down and began to offer another long explanation; but, by then, my mind had completely switched off from his problem and issues.
 
Three other cases that we dealt with at Moneylife Foundation (MLF), in recent times, have provoked this piece. In two cases, the complainant was highly educated, with global experience at a very senior management level; and, yet, had been running around for months to have simple financial issues resolved. The worst of these was the case of Arjun Singh (name changed)—of interest being wrongly charged by a small bank which takes pride in being fair to customers. Not only were his representations to the bank ignored, but he also lost his case before the banking ombudsman. Not one to give up, Arjun had been doggedly pursuing the case for four years, before he approached MLF. Perplexed at what seemed such a straightforward issue, I asked him to email me, and the problem suddenly became clear. 
 
What I received was a convoluted and garbled mix of documents expressing anger and recrimination with a litany of disjointed facts which nobody, who was not directly involved with the case, would have any interest in deciphering. 
 
The second case was that of Vijay Sharma (name changed), 70, a, ‘Diamond customer’, of a public sector bank whose ATM failed to deliver the Rs15,000 he had withdrawn. To add insult to injury, the amount had been debited twice, since he made a second attempt to get the cash. The bank claims that the money was, indeed, withdrawn by Vijay, but hasn’t come up with a video recording even after four months of the complaint. Here, again, the bank is clearly at fault; but the customer’s letter to the bank, copied to us, was a surprise. There was no narration of facts upfront; reference to enclosures and passbook were not attached; the significant fact of his being a Diamond customer who was with the bank for 42 long years and no previous record of disputes was mentioned. The throwaway last line was more out of anger about the shabby treatment.
 
The third case was a fake credit card transaction of Rs25,000 in the account of Karan Shetty (name changed). The money went to a large private insurance company, leaving a clear trail. The bank probably suspected it was someone known to Karan. After giving him a four-month run-around, including making him file a first information report (FIR) with the police, when there was no redress, he approached MLF and the matter was resolved. But it took some handholding just to get the complaint written in a manner that would ensure resolution. 
 
Clearly, many consumer battles are lost because people fail to articulate issues correctly. Here are five things that will ensure a proper hearing and improve your chances of getting early redress.
 
1. State the facts in a clear, concise and sequential manner; outline the steps, if any, that you have already taken towards resolution (online complaint or first-level complaint at the bank).
 
2. Ensure that all identification details are provided (name, address, account/credit card number, transaction details, amounts involved, dates, etc). 
 
3. Be polite and avoid threats, sarcasm and anger in your first letter. The consumer services executive is trying to help; he or she is not personally responsible for your problem. 
 
4. Don’t ask people to wade through fat attachments in which you have marked or highlighted a few lines. All such documents must be neatly cross-referenced and attached only for substantiation and verification, if required. 
 
5. Mention clearly the outcome you are seeking and don’t get unrealistic with demands for an apology or compensation; resolution must be the first priority. Remember, everybody has limited time.

User

COMMENTS

Gopalakrishnan T V

7 months ago

Excellent. These days the complaints are on the increase because of increased use of fast changing technology and ever reducing involvement of human resources in understanding the customers and their real problems and issues. As rightly said, no one has time to view seriously when some complaints are received. Even if some one takes it up to solve the technology comes in the way. The problem is there is no proper coordination of technology and human resources and programmes developed in banks are without understanding the transactions and the rationale behind such transactions. However, the general approach to ignore the customers is a serious matter and here in comes the help from Money Life Team. The money life does a wonderful job in making both the institutions and customers aware of their duties and responsibilities. The customers really stand to benefit and the Institutions are made accountable for their irresponsible way of doing business.

Ramesh Poapt

8 months ago

excellent! I have won three such battles with banks after a long struggle.And one with auto co. But such matters are too tough to handle really!

Dr. Rakesh Goyal

8 months ago

Another thing noticed is that many people do not provide the relevant reference including and not limited to what, when, where, who, how and factual material details. Please try to make no assumptions. They do not start the letter/complaint/service-request from point zero giving sequence of events from start, in simple and concise language. They write the letter/complaint as if the receiving person knows the problem and start from a point, which is not from zero but is current in their mind. Even if the receiving person knows the problem, it is always better to define the problem again as ready reference, so that s/he need not search previous document/mails. For reminders or responses to their queries, it is also advisable to attach previous correspondence as ready reference. It may cost some efforts/money (if photocopied on paper), but it is enabling the receiver to get all past info at one place. It is also advisable to discuss the matter on phone after sending the correspondence (electronically or paper-based) with politeness. Threat only works, when you have admissible evidence of his/her wrong doing, which may damage his/her career. Threat must also be polite. Anger does not works unless one is good actor.

Hemant Chitale

8 months ago

Very true. Drafting a complaint requires cool thinking. Hyperbole and sarcasm don't help. Your examples relate to money issues and (it's not unsurprising ?) many people don't stay level when discussing money which may have been lost. However, your rules apply in all cases with any authority. Hopefully, the recipient authority also has a similar set of rules as to how to read a complaint and respond to it.

Hemant Chitale

8 months ago

Very true. Drafting a complaint requires cool thinking. Hyperbole and sarcasm don't help. Your examples relate to money issues and (it's not unsurprising ?) many people don't stay level when discussing money which may have been lost. However, your rules apply in all cases with any authority. Hopefully, the recipient authority also has a similar set of rules as to how to read a complaint and respond to it.

Deepak Narain

8 months ago

This article is very relevant to my ongoing dispute with the ICICI Bank. Can I write my case to you for help?

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)