2003 (3) TMI 535 - Commission - Companies Law

Summary

Issues:
1. Ex parte order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II against the appellant.
2. Complaint regarding non-payment of maturity amount of investments made in bonds.
3. Allegation of deficiency in service and non-payment of redemption money.
4. Claim for interest, mental harassment compensation, and litigation costs.
5. Contention regarding denial of opportunity to contest the case due to alleged improper service of notice.
6. Argument regarding company undergoing liquidation and its impact on the complaint case.

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged an ex parte order by the District Forum regarding a complaint filed by the respondent seeking payment of maturity amount for investments in bonds. The complainant alleged deficiency in service as the redemption money was not paid, claiming interest, mental harassment compensation, and litigation costs. The District Forum, relying on ex parte evidence, directed the appellants to pay the complainant the invested amount with interest and litigation costs.

2. The appellant contended that notice of the complaint case was improperly served, particularly to OP Nos. 2 and 3 due to address changes. However, the appellant's head office address was correct, and the closure of the Chandigarh office was an internal decision not communicated to the complainant. The appellant argued that the liquidation of the company does not absolve them from the complaint case under the Consumer Protection Act, suggesting the issue be raised during execution of the order.

3. The appellant acknowledged the investment and redemption of bonds but emphasized the company's liquidation status. The appellant proposed addressing the liquidation issue during execution proceedings, indicating that legal pleas could be raised before the Executing Court. The judgment dismissed the appeal, noting no infirmity in the order, suggesting the appellant raise relevant issues during execution. The Executing Court would consider such submissions in accordance with the law.

This judgment highlights the importance of proper notice service, the impact of company liquidation on consumer complaints, and the opportunity to raise legal issues during execution proceedings despite dismissal of the appeal.