[Resolved] Rose Valley — It is authirized by RBI | |
collecting money as RD & FD rose vally chain marketing system is a corporate agent of LIC of India but they collect money as RD & FD and the fund use in their own business, my question is 1. if the company faliure who will responsible to pay my maturity amount 2. what is the present rating of the company what is your suggession, how much safe i am in the company as a invester... Was this information helpful? | |
Aug 14, 2020 Complaint marked as Resolved | |
 185 Comments | |
Comments
is rosevalley is in black listed companies by r.b.i, , , and their real estate construction ltd business any kind of approved by sebi ? please send your feed back in my email id
[protected]@in.com
[protected]@in.com
KONO COMP...JADI TAR LIABILITIES, ASSETS THEKE BARIA FELE TABE SEI COMP.. R THAKBE NA.KINTU ROSE VALLEY TAR ASSETS ANEK BESI BARIACHE LIABILITIES THEKE, THAI ROSE VALLEY 100% SECURE COMPANY.
Some people are telling Rose Valley is secure and 100% trustable company. However, no one is giving any trustable reason. So, all the comments posted here in favour of rose valley are seemed to be useless. Also, if SEBI ordered to not collect any money from the customers then how the company can exits in future. I am pretty sure the company will be disappeard very soon.
For your information I am provding you the detailed infromation from SEBI regarding not to collect any money from the customer.
1
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
ORDER
UNDER SECTION 11B OF SEBI ACT 1992 READ WITH SEBI (COLLECTIVE
INVESTMENT SCHEMES) REGULATIONS 1999 IN THE MATTER OF ROSE
VALLEY REAL ESTATES & CONSTRUCTIONS LTD
1. Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) received a letter dated December 7, 2009
from the Director of the Economic Offences Investigation Cell, Government of West
Bengal stating that “M/s. Rose Valley" had been raising funds in certain districts of West
Bengal, and as such was allegedly running a Collective Investment Scheme (hereinafter
referred to as ‘CIS’) without obtaining a Certificate of Registration from SEBI.
Preliminary enquiries in this regard were made with the company. Details of mobilization
of funds were sought to examine the applicability of the SEBI (Collective Investment
Schemes) Regulations, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIS Regulations’) and to
ensure that the interest of investors is adequately protected. In the course of the enquiry,
it was observed that one of the group companies, M/s Rose Valley Real Estates and
Constructions Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company/ Rose Valley), has been
inviting contributions from the general public through one ‘Ashirbad’ scheme without
obtaining a Certificate of Registration from SEBI.
2. I note that M/s. Rose Valley Resorts and Plantation Limited (hereinafter referred to as
the ‘RRPL’) was running a CIS Scheme since 1997. RRPL had filed an application with
SEBI for grant of certificate of registration pursuant to the notification of the CIS
Regulations on October 15, 1999. However, the said application of the company was
rejected by SEBI in 2003, following which it wound up the CIS scheme and repaid
money to investors.
3. Information/ documents were sought from the company vide separate letters dated
January 8, 2010, March 3, 2010, May 17, 2010, July 9, 2010 and November 3, 2010. The
company was asked to provide information regarding the terms and conditions of the
schemes, whether instruments were issued to the investors after receipt of funds,
whether such instruments are transferable, options available to the investor if he did not
want to own the land, quantum of funds raised through the schemes from the public
along with period of such schemes, and promises or assurances or claims of assured
returns made in the schemes. Further, SEBI asked for certified copies of offer
2
documents, application forms, pamphlets, brochures of the schemes launched and
copies of the executed agreements between the company and the investors.
4. The company, vide its letters dated February 8, 2010, March 18, 2010, June 18, 2010 and
August 20, 2010 provided information about its nature of business. Further, vide SEBI’s
letter dated November 3, 2010, the company was, inter alia, asked to submit the details of
allotment of land to investors. In response to same, the company has, vide its letter
dated November 15, 2010, sought three months time to provide the information and has
also stated that it may provide the information in a phased manner. It is noted that the
company did not have the basic data, which is similar to unit holders’ register, readily
available.
5. Based on the submission of the company, I note the following:
a. The scheme involves selling of plots of land on a future date against Earnest Money
(hereinafter referred to as ‘EM’/ ‘EMD’) received in advance in installments;
b. A portion of the agreed sale price of the plot is given as EM as per a pre fixed table
and the company issues money receipt against each such deposit;
c. The company provides a pre determined credit value against the EM so deposited
and the same is adjusted against the purchase value of the plot;
d. If a person does not want to possess the land after payment of EM, the pre
determined credit value is returned to him; the credit value so determined is more than
the total EM. This is evident from the following tables:
Table – 1
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 1 katta)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 420/- 5040/- 5400/- 360/- 12.50% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 210/- 5040/- 6050/- 1010/- 17.50% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 140/- 5040/- 6838/- 1798-/ 19.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 90/- 5400/- 8812/- 3762/- 18.00% (Approx)
Table – 2
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 2 kattas)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 840/- 10080/- 10800/- 720/- 12.80% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 420/- 10080/- 12100/- 2020/- 17.50% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 280/- 10080/- 13676/- 3596/- 19.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 170/- 10200/- 17624/- 7424/- 20.00% (Approx)
3
Table – 3
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 3 kattas)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 1250/- 15000/- 16200/- 1200/- 14.00% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 630/- 15120/- 18150/- 3030/- 17.50% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 420/- 15120/- 20514/- 5394/- 20.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 250/- 15000/- 26436/- 11436/- 21.00% (Approx)
Table – 4
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 5 kattas)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 2090/- 25080/- 27000/- 1920/- 13.50% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 1050/- 25200/- 30250/- 5050/- 17.50% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 700/- 25200/- 34190/- 8990/- 19.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 420/- 25200/- 44060/- 18860/- 21.00% (Approx)
Table – 5
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 10 kattas)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 4170/- 50040/- 54000/- 3960/- 13.50% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 2090/- 50160/- 60500/- 10340/- 18.00% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 1390/- 50040/- 68380/- 18340/- 20.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 840/- 50400/- 88120/- 37720/- 21.00% (Approx)
Table – 6
Ashirbad Scheme – B(for 1 katta)**
Options Initial payment
( )
Credit Value ( ) Excess amt refunded
( )
Annualised return *
E-2 (36 Months) 5000/- 7000/- 2000/- 11.40 % (Approx)
E-3 (70 Months) 5000/- 10000/- 5000/- 12.00% (Approx)
* The interest rate has been calculated on ‘Quarterly compounding’ basis.
** In this case the credit value is proportionate for 1 katta, 2 kattas, 3 kattas, 5 kattas & 10 kattas.
6. In response to SEBI’s letter dated May 17, 2010 and July 9, 2010 seeking more details
about the location of the land bank, plots allotted under the scheme, EMD received
under the scheme, refund made due to cancellation of booking etc, the company has
provided the information vide their letters dated June 18, 2010 and August 20, 2010 and
the same can be observed from the Table -7 given below.
7. The company has mobilised 1271.98 crore till March 31, 2010 under the ‘Ashirbad’
scheme and has made a refund of 342.20 crore to those investors who opted for the
‘credit value’ instead of the land booked. The details of the fund mobilized and refund
made by the company are shown in the following table:
4
Table – 7
Financial
Year
No. of Plots
allotted under
the Ashirbad
scheme
No of Plots
(along with
area) actually
handed over
Total Amount
received as on
date under
Ashirbad
Scheme (Cl
Bal)
Total EMD
received as on
date under
Ashirbad
Scheme
(Cl Bal)
No. of
plots(along
with area)
where
refunds
have been
given
Amount of
EMD in
refund
cases
Total
amount of
refund
made till
date
(Kattas) ( /Cr) ( /Cr) (Kattas) ( /Cr) ( /Cr)
[protected].55 2.55 - - -
[protected].82 3.82 - - -
[protected].75 3.75 208 0.52 0.52
[protected].93 45.93 712 1.78 1.78
[protected].52 225.52 1056 2.64 2.64
[protected].38 566.38 1592 3.98 3.98
[protected]area
under
provisional
allotment)
Plots: 4045
Rea: 9132
(agreement
for sale made
towards
allotment) 1271.98 1271.[protected].20 342.20
8. I observe that the land bank of the company consists of land located in various areas like
Rajarhat, Durgapur, Salboni, Jhargram, Bankura, Saltora, Bagnan, Malbazar, Siliguri,
Birbhum, Maldah, Ranaghat, Agartala (Tripura), Chindbara (MP), Orissa etc.
9. I have carefully considered the various documents on record, including the submissions
made by the company. I note that:-
a. The company invites application to book plots of land for residential/ commercial
units. It undertakes to develop the property into ‘Rose Valley City’ by making
master plots (commercial plots, mall, play grounds, residential plots) of the units so
that several person/ persons after purchase of the Master Plots can build their own
house. Development of the land in such a way requires pooling of the money
received in installments from the different potential purchasers of the land. The
company, in one of its letter has also submitted the following:
“Since the value of stock of Land originally earmarked to the customers
against advance booking of plots have also appreciated with the passage of
time, the amount of credit value of Rs. 45 crore that were paid to the
customers, instead of land, are being treated as an increased value of the
stock of land under the possession of the company”
5
From the above it is clear that the land allotment is not made vis-à-vis the investor
i.e. there is no demarcation of land for the investor and his investments, thus the
investments appears to be pooled when the investors are paying EM installments.
Further, a typical real estate business would price its land banks depending on the
location, terrain, current and future potential o[censored]se of the land/ land bank. It is a
prevalent and innate feature of real estate that even within the same location, there
may be differential pricing taking into account the floor rise, etc. However, the
schemes of the company claim to be a pure real estate developer on the premise that
all investors in these schemes get a piece of land at a fixed price. As per the
submissions, the company has land banks at more than one place. Lands/ land banks
at difference places would be valued differently. However, it is noted that in the
current case no demarcation in terms of pricing of land. The land is proposed to be
sold according to the plans offered under the Ashirbad scheme and not on the basis
of pricing of land based on its location or otherwise. Hence, it appears that the land
units are fungible and irrespective of location, the price remains the same.
b. The investors have an option to receive the credit value after making payment of the
entire earnest money installments. It is observed that the investment is made with a
view to earn profit.
c. The specification of the land given in the agreement is not in terms of any khata/
khasra/ street etc., as generally land is identified in revenue department. It is
observed that the mention of a plot no. in the agreement is more in the nature and
form of a unit issued by the company. Further, it is on record that all such plots,
whether identified or not, which form part of the schemes are managed by the
company on behalf of the investors. Thus the management of the money lies with
Rose Valley and the investors do not have any day to day control over the
management and operation of the scheme. The investors need to approach the
company when they wish to get a refund for their investment or get final allotment
of land.
10. In addition to these notings, the following is observed:
6
a. A typical real estate business would make a case for selling the portions of land by
penalizing the investor(s) backing out from the agreement by forfeiting the earnest
money. In the current case, the company itself has stated that “many of the
intending purchasers do not opt for execution of agreement”. I note that as per the
‘agreement for sale’, the company shall forfeit 25% of the amount paid by the
investor if the investor does not want to purchase the agreed Master Plot in spite
of making payment of the entire consideration money. However, cancellation
before the payment of the entire consideration money does not attract any penalty.
The company, on the other hand, offers a benefit to investors who choose to opt
out of allotment of land by providing them the option of gaining lucrative returns
in the form of credit value. Thus this appears to be more of an investment avenue
rather than a real estate company scheme.
b. The installment plan outlined at Table 1 above seems to offer an investment
scheme rather than a real-estate business plan where investments for as low as Rs.
420 p.m. (Ashirbad Scheme – A for 1 katta of land) have been invited.
c. Further it is evident from the Table 7 above, that in FY 2009-10, the number of
plots ‘allotted’- ‘provisionally allotted’ as per scheme definition stands at 508792
kattas of land. However, only 4045 plots have been actually handed over. The
number of plots for which refund has been made in FY 2009-10 is 118880 plots.
Hence, even though the company is collecting huge amounts as earnest money, the
actual allotments do not seem to form a substantial number as compared to
number of plots provisionally allotted.
d. Thus it is observed that the scheme of ‘allotment’ as purported to be real estate by
the Company, is in fact be a garb for collecting monies for collective investment
and then providing returns. In the case of PGFL, where CIS schemes were touted
as real estate business, the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana has stated
that ---
“The agreement to sell and the sample sale deed relied upon to demonstrate
that the sole activity of the PGFL is sale and purchase of agricultural land
and/or sale and development of agricultural land, is a sham and a mere paper
transaction. The said activity of sale and purchase of agricultural land and/or
development of agricultural land, projected by the PGFL, in our view, is with
the aim and object of screening its real activity…
7
… irrespective of the preceding conclusion, on an analysis of the activities of
the PGFL (as have been projected by it), it is clear that the PGFL satisfies all
characteristics/ingredients of a 'collective investment scheme', expressed, in
section 11AA(2) of the SEBI Act. The PGFL is, therefore, a 'Collective
Investment Scheme' for the purposes of the SEBI Act.”
e. Given the above, I note that the schemes of the Company are more CIS schemes
than real estate schemes.
11. Section 11AA of the SEBI Act, 1992 provides that any scheme or arrangement which
satisfies the following conditions shall be a collective investment scheme:
a. the contributions, or payments made by the investors, by whatever name
called, are pooled and utilized solely for the purposes of the scheme or
arrangement;
b. the contributions or payments are made to such scheme or arrangement by
the investors with a view to receive profits, income, produce or property,
whether movable or immovable from such scheme or arrangement;
c. the property, contribution or investment forming part of the scheme or
arrangement, whether identifiable or not, is managed on behalf of the
investors;
d. the investors do not have day to day control over the management and
operation of the scheme or arrangement.
12. Thus, the company is raising funds in the name of sale of plots of land. It first receives
earnest money in installments from a purchaser, pools the fund so mobilized and uses it
to develop the land, and thereafter provides return at the option of the investor on the
amount invested at the end of the scheme in the form of credit value. This credit value
can then be utilized by the investor to either adjust partly against the cost of land or to
get refund for the investments made from the company. These activities of the company
are akin to the features of a CIS, specified under the section 11AA of the SEBI Act read
with regulation 3 of the CIS regulations.
13. In view of the foregoing, it prima facie appears that the company is running CIS schemes
without obtaining a certificate of registration from SEBI. Thus, M/s. Rose Valley Real
8
Estate and Construction Ltd. has prima facie violated regulation 3 of CIS Regulations read
with section 11AA of the SEBI Act, 1992.
14. The interest of investors is the first and foremost mandate for SEBI. Under the facts and
circumstances of the case, SEBI has to take emergent steps to prevent activities indulged
into by companies or entities defrauding the investors, damaging the orderly
development of the securities market. I note that M/s. Rose Valley Real Estate and
Construction Ltd. has to be prevented from further carrying on the activities of a CIS,
including soliciting money from the public, without due registration from SEBI.
15. In view of the same, I, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me under section 11B
of the SEBI Act, 1992 and regulation 65 of CIS Regulations, hereby direct the company:
a. not to collect any money from investors or to launch any scheme;
b. not to dispose of any of the properties or delineate assets of the scheme;
c. not to divert any fund raised from public at large kept in bank account
and/or at the custody of the company.
16. The above directions shall take effect immediately and shall be in force until further
orders. The company may file its objections to this order, if any, within 15 days from the
date of this order. Further, the company may, if it so desires, avail itself of an
opportunity of personal hearing on a date and a time to be fixed on specific request, to
be received in this behalf from the company within 15 days from the date of this order.
Place: Mumbai PRASHANT SARAN
Date: January 03, 2011 WHOLE TIME MEMBER
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
1
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
ORDER
UNDER SECTION 11B OF SEBI ACT 1992 READ WITH SEBI (COLLECTIVE
INVESTMENT SCHEMES) REGULATIONS 1999 IN THE MATTER OF ROSE
VALLEY REAL ESTATES & CONSTRUCTIONS LTD
1. Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) received a letter dated December 7, 2009
from the Director of the Economic Offences Investigation Cell, Government of West
Bengal stating that “M/s. Rose Valley" had been raising funds in certain districts of West
Bengal, and as such was allegedly running a Collective Investment Scheme (hereinafter
referred to as ‘CIS’) without obtaining a Certificate of Registration from SEBI.
Preliminary enquiries in this regard were made with the company. Details of mobilization
of funds were sought to examine the applicability of the SEBI (Collective Investment
Schemes) Regulations, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIS Regulations’) and to
ensure that the interest of investors is adequately protected. In the course of the enquiry,
it was observed that one of the group companies, M/s Rose Valley Real Estates and
Constructions Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company/ Rose Valley), has been
inviting contributions from the general public through one ‘Ashirbad’ scheme without
obtaining a Certificate of Registration from SEBI.
2. I note that M/s. Rose Valley Resorts and Plantation Limited (hereinafter referred to as
the ‘RRPL’) was running a CIS Scheme since 1997. RRPL had filed an application with
SEBI for grant of certificate of registration pursuant to the notification of the CIS
Regulations on October 15, 1999. However, the said application of the company was
rejected by SEBI in 2003, following which it wound up the CIS scheme and repaid
money to investors.
3. Information/ documents were sought from the company vide separate letters dated
January 8, 2010, March 3, 2010, May 17, 2010, July 9, 2010 and November 3, 2010. The
company was asked to provide information regarding the terms and conditions of the
schemes, whether instruments were issued to the investors after receipt of funds,
whether such instruments are transferable, options available to the investor if he did not
want to own the land, quantum of funds raised through the schemes from the public
along with period of such schemes, and promises or assurances or claims of assured
returns made in the schemes. Further, SEBI asked for certified copies of offer
2
documents, application forms, pamphlets, brochures of the schemes launched and
copies of the executed agreements between the company and the investors.
4. The company, vide its letters dated February 8, 2010, March 18, 2010, June 18, 2010 and
August 20, 2010 provided information about its nature of business. Further, vide SEBI’s
letter dated November 3, 2010, the company was, inter alia, asked to submit the details of
allotment of land to investors. In response to same, the company has, vide its letter
dated November 15, 2010, sought three months time to provide the information and has
also stated that it may provide the information in a phased manner. It is noted that the
company did not have the basic data, which is similar to unit holders’ register, readily
available.
5. Based on the submission of the company, I note the following:
a. The scheme involves selling of plots of land on a future date against Earnest Money
(hereinafter referred to as ‘EM’/ ‘EMD’) received in advance in installments;
b. A portion of the agreed sale price of the plot is given as EM as per a pre fixed table
and the company issues money receipt against each such deposit;
c. The company provides a pre determined credit value against the EM so deposited
and the same is adjusted against the purchase value of the plot;
d. If a person does not want to possess the land after payment of EM, the pre
determined credit value is returned to him; the credit value so determined is more than
the total EM. This is evident from the following tables:
Table – 1
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 1 katta)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 420/- 5040/- 5400/- 360/- 12.50% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 210/- 5040/- 6050/- 1010/- 17.50% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 140/- 5040/- 6838/- 1798-/ 19.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 90/- 5400/- 8812/- 3762/- 18.00% (Approx)
Table – 2
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 2 kattas)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 840/- 10080/- 10800/- 720/- 12.80% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 420/- 10080/- 12100/- 2020/- 17.50% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 280/- 10080/- 13676/- 3596/- 19.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 170/- 10200/- 17624/- 7424/- 20.00% (Approx)
3
Table – 3
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 3 kattas)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 1250/- 15000/- 16200/- 1200/- 14.00% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 630/- 15120/- 18150/- 3030/- 17.50% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 420/- 15120/- 20514/- 5394/- 20.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 250/- 15000/- 26436/- 11436/- 21.00% (Approx)
Table – 4
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 5 kattas)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 2090/- 25080/- 27000/- 1920/- 13.50% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 1050/- 25200/- 30250/- 5050/- 17.50% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 700/- 25200/- 34190/- 8990/- 19.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 420/- 25200/- 44060/- 18860/- 21.00% (Approx)
Table – 5
Ashirbad Scheme – A (for 10 kattas)
Option Monthly
instalment ( )
Total EMD
( )
Credit Value
( )
Excess amt
refunded ( )
Annualised return
*
E (12 months) 4170/- 50040/- 54000/- 3960/- 13.50% (Approx)
E-1 (24 months) 2090/- 50160/- 60500/- 10340/- 18.00% (Approx)
E-2 (36 months) 1390/- 50040/- 68380/- 18340/- 20.00% (Approx)
E-3 (60 months) 840/- 50400/- 88120/- 37720/- 21.00% (Approx)
Table – 6
Ashirbad Scheme – B(for 1 katta)**
Options Initial payment
( )
Credit Value ( ) Excess amt refunded
( )
Annualised return *
E-2 (36 Months) 5000/- 7000/- 2000/- 11.40 % (Approx)
E-3 (70 Months) 5000/- 10000/- 5000/- 12.00% (Approx)
* The interest rate has been calculated on ‘Quarterly compounding’ basis.
** In this case the credit value is proportionate for 1 katta, 2 kattas, 3 kattas, 5 kattas & 10 kattas.
6. In response to SEBI’s letter dated May 17, 2010 and July 9, 2010 seeking more details
about the location of the land bank, plots allotted under the scheme, EMD received
under the scheme, refund made due to cancellation of booking etc, the company has
provided the information vide their letters dated June 18, 2010 and August 20, 2010 and
the same can be observed from the Table -7 given below.
7. The company has mobilised 1271.98 crore till March 31, 2010 under the ‘Ashirbad’
scheme and has made a refund of 342.20 crore to those investors who opted for the
‘credit value’ instead of the land booked. The details of the fund mobilized and refund
made by the company are shown in the following table:
4
Table – 7
Financial
Year
No. of Plots
allotted under
the Ashirbad
scheme
No of Plots
(along with
area) actually
handed over
Total Amount
received as on
date under
Ashirbad
Scheme (Cl
Bal)
Total EMD
received as on
date under
Ashirbad
Scheme
(Cl Bal)
No. of
plots(along
with area)
where
refunds
have been
given
Amount of
EMD in
refund
cases
Total
amount of
refund
made till
date
(Kattas) ( /Cr) ( /Cr) (Kattas) ( /Cr) ( /Cr)
[protected].55 2.55 - - -
[protected].82 3.82 - - -
[protected].75 3.75 208 0.52 0.52
[protected].93 45.93 712 1.78 1.78
[protected].52 225.52 1056 2.64 2.64
[protected].38 566.38 1592 3.98 3.98
[protected]area
under
provisional
allotment)
Plots: 4045
Rea: 9132
(agreement
for sale made
towards
allotment) 1271.98 1271.[protected].20 342.20
8. I observe that the land bank of the company consists of land located in various areas like
Rajarhat, Durgapur, Salboni, Jhargram, Bankura, Saltora, Bagnan, Malbazar, Siliguri,
Birbhum, Maldah, Ranaghat, Agartala (Tripura), Chindbara (MP), Orissa etc.
9. I have carefully considered the various documents on record, including the submissions
made by the company. I note that:-
a. The company invites application to book plots of land for residential/ commercial
units. It undertakes to develop the property into ‘Rose Valley City’ by making
master plots (commercial plots, mall, play grounds, residential plots) of the units so
that several person/ persons after purchase of the Master Plots can build their own
house. Development of the land in such a way requires pooling of the money
received in installments from the different potential purchasers of the land. The
company, in one of its letter has also submitted the following:
“Since the value of stock of Land originally earmarked to the customers
against advance booking of plots have also appreciated with the passage of
time, the amount of credit value of Rs. 45 crore that were paid to the
customers, instead of land, are being treated as an increased value of the
stock of land under the possession of the company”
5
From the above it is clear that the land allotment is not made vis-à-vis the investor
i.e. there is no demarcation of land for the investor and his investments, thus the
investments appears to be pooled when the investors are paying EM installments.
Further, a typical real estate business would price its land banks depending on the
location, terrain, current and future potential o[censored]se of the land/ land bank. It is a
prevalent and innate feature of real estate that even within the same location, there
may be differential pricing taking into account the floor rise, etc. However, the
schemes of the company claim to be a pure real estate developer on the premise that
all investors in these schemes get a piece of land at a fixed price. As per the
submissions, the company has land banks at more than one place. Lands/ land banks
at difference places would be valued differently. However, it is noted that in the
current case no demarcation in terms of pricing of land. The land is proposed to be
sold according to the plans offered under the Ashirbad scheme and not on the basis
of pricing of land based on its location or otherwise. Hence, it appears that the land
units are fungible and irrespective of location, the price remains the same.
b. The investors have an option to receive the credit value after making payment of the
entire earnest money installments. It is observed that the investment is made with a
view to earn profit.
c. The specification of the land given in the agreement is not in terms of any khata/
khasra/ street etc., as generally land is identified in revenue department. It is
observed that the mention of a plot no. in the agreement is more in the nature and
form of a unit issued by the company. Further, it is on record that all such plots,
whether identified or not, which form part of the schemes are managed by the
company on behalf of the investors. Thus the management of the money lies with
Rose Valley and the investors do not have any day to day control over the
management and operation of the scheme. The investors need to approach the
company when they wish to get a refund for their investment or get final allotment
of land.
10. In addition to these notings, the following is observed:
6
a. A typical real estate business would make a case for selling the portions of land by
penalizing the investor(s) backing out from the agreement by forfeiting the earnest
money. In the current case, the company itself has stated that “many of the
intending purchasers do not opt for execution of agreement”. I note that as per the
‘agreement for sale’, the company shall forfeit 25% of the amount paid by the
investor if the investor does not want to purchase the agreed Master Plot in spite
of making payment of the entire consideration money. However, cancellation
before the payment of the entire consideration money does not attract any penalty.
The company, on the other hand, offers a benefit to investors who choose to opt
out of allotment of land by providing them the option of gaining lucrative returns
in the form of credit value. Thus this appears to be more of an investment avenue
rather than a real estate company scheme.
b. The installment plan outlined at Table 1 above seems to offer an investment
scheme rather than a real-estate business plan where investments for as low as Rs.
420 p.m. (Ashirbad Scheme – A for 1 katta of land) have been invited.
c. Further it is evident from the Table 7 above, that in FY 2009-10, the number of
plots ‘allotted’- ‘provisionally allotted’ as per scheme definition stands at 508792
kattas of land. However, only 4045 plots have been actually handed over. The
number of plots for which refund has been made in FY 2009-10 is 118880 plots.
Hence, even though the company is collecting huge amounts as earnest money, the
actual allotments do not seem to form a substantial number as compared to
number of plots provisionally allotted.
d. Thus it is observed that the scheme of ‘allotment’ as purported to be real estate by
the Company, is in fact be a garb for collecting monies for collective investment
and then providing returns. In the case of PGFL, where CIS schemes were touted
as real estate business, the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana has stated
that ---
“The agreement to sell and the sample sale deed relied upon to demonstrate
that the sole activity of the PGFL is sale and purchase of agricultural land
and/or sale and development of agricultural land, is a sham and a mere paper
transaction. The said activity of sale and purchase of agricultural land and/or
development of agricultural land, projected by the PGFL, in our view, is with
the aim and object of screening its real activity…
7
… irrespective of the preceding conclusion, on an analysis of the activities of
the PGFL (as have been projected by it), it is clear that the PGFL satisfies all
characteristics/ingredients of a 'collective investment scheme', expressed, in
section 11AA(2) of the SEBI Act. The PGFL is, therefore, a 'Collective
Investment Scheme' for the purposes of the SEBI Act.”
e. Given the above, I note that the schemes of the Company are more CIS schemes
than real estate schemes.
11. Section 11AA of the SEBI Act, 1992 provides that any scheme or arrangement which
satisfies the following conditions shall be a collective investment scheme:
a. the contributions, or payments made by the investors, by whatever name
called, are pooled and utilized solely for the purposes of the scheme or
arrangement;
b. the contributions or payments are made to such scheme or arrangement by
the investors with a view to receive profits, income, produce or property,
whether movable or immovable from such scheme or arrangement;
c. the property, contribution or investment forming part of the scheme or
arrangement, whether identifiable or not, is managed on behalf of the
investors;
d. the investors do not have day to day control over the management and
operation of the scheme or arrangement.
12. Thus, the company is raising funds in the name of sale of plots of land. It first receives
earnest money in installments from a purchaser, pools the fund so mobilized and uses it
to develop the land, and thereafter provides return at the option of the investor on the
amount invested at the end of the scheme in the form of credit value. This credit value
can then be utilized by the investor to either adjust partly against the cost of land or to
get refund for the investments made from the company. These activities of the company
are akin to the features of a CIS, specified under the section 11AA of the SEBI Act read
with regulation 3 of the CIS regulations.
13. In view of the foregoing, it prima facie appears that the company is running CIS schemes
without obtaining a certificate of registration from SEBI. Thus, M/s. Rose Valley Real
8
Estate and Construction Ltd. has prima facie violated regulation 3 of CIS Regulations read
with section 11AA of the SEBI Act, 1992.
14. The interest of investors is the first and foremost mandate for SEBI. Under the facts and
circumstances of the case, SEBI has to take emergent steps to prevent activities indulged
into by companies or entities defrauding the investors, damaging the orderly
development of the securities market. I note that M/s. Rose Valley Real Estate and
Construction Ltd. has to be prevented from further carrying on the activities of a CIS,
including soliciting money from the public, without due registration from SEBI.
15. In view of the same, I, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me under section 11B
of the SEBI Act, 1992 and regulation 65 of CIS Regulations, hereby direct the company:
a. not to collect any money from investors or to launch any scheme;
b. not to dispose of any of the properties or delineate assets of the scheme;
c. not to divert any fund raised from public at large kept in bank account
and/or at the custody of the company.
16. The above directions shall take effect immediately and shall be in force until further
orders. The company may file its objections to this order, if any, within 15 days from the
date of this order. Further, the company may, if it so desires, avail itself of an
opportunity of personal hearing on a date and a time to be fixed on specific request, to
be received in this behalf from the company within 15 days from the date of this order.
Place: Mumbai PRASHANT SARAN
Date: January 03, 2011 WHOLE TIME MEMBER
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
Rose Valley collect public money through RD& FD . Invest this money in films, TV chanal and Hotel business. So..this company NOT authorised by any Govt. body like RBI or SEBI.
I am Abhishek Bose, Son of Sri Bijan Bose resided at 54/D Nimtala Ghat Street, Kolkata-700 006. Recently I open a recurrimg book with Rose Valley Mothly scheme.Can you contact me in [protected] for details? It is needful to me.
Thanks.
Thanks.
All,
I am a Stanford University MBA, work for a fortune 100 Co. in USA. Ami gatobar jakhan Kolkata berate gechilam ekjon Rosevalley agent amake Rosevalley products kinte bolechillo RD / FD etc. I did not buy ... the whole business seemed very risky ... without much protection to investors ... owners of Rosevalley je kono din tala mere udhao hoyee jete pare ... kichchu korer thakbe na.
If you go to Rosevalley's website, , , , , the picture is very clear. The only business that Rosevalley can really backup is insurance. If they are registered LICI agents and sell LICI insurance products ... this will not fail. Just make sure that your premiums are same - if the insurance was purchased from any other LICI agent (kichu bashe charge korche na ... like additional commissions etc.)
All other types of businesses they have are extremely risky and can go under at any-point of time. Especially the film and entertainment business …. currently hugh returns but enormous risk as well ….. return and risk are directly proportional. Real Estate, Hotels & Resorts and Fashion are just as risky as Film and Entertainment, if not more.
Jara Rosevalley er support ee comments likheche ….. most probably Rosevalley er management er lokjon …. tara nejeder puro naamta likhte porjonto bhai pai ….. upnara kake biswas kore nijeder ato kosto kore rojgar kara taka 3 to 4 % besi interest er lobhe nasto korben.
Rosevalley colorful pamphlet chapeyee apnader chokhe rangeen chosma poreyee …… boka bananor chesta korche ……. mone rakhbeen …. lobhe paap ….. paapee mrityu ...
Deep Chanda
I am a Stanford University MBA, work for a fortune 100 Co. in USA. Ami gatobar jakhan Kolkata berate gechilam ekjon Rosevalley agent amake Rosevalley products kinte bolechillo RD / FD etc. I did not buy ... the whole business seemed very risky ... without much protection to investors ... owners of Rosevalley je kono din tala mere udhao hoyee jete pare ... kichchu korer thakbe na.
If you go to Rosevalley's website, , , , , the picture is very clear. The only business that Rosevalley can really backup is insurance. If they are registered LICI agents and sell LICI insurance products ... this will not fail. Just make sure that your premiums are same - if the insurance was purchased from any other LICI agent (kichu bashe charge korche na ... like additional commissions etc.)
All other types of businesses they have are extremely risky and can go under at any-point of time. Especially the film and entertainment business …. currently hugh returns but enormous risk as well ….. return and risk are directly proportional. Real Estate, Hotels & Resorts and Fashion are just as risky as Film and Entertainment, if not more.
Jara Rosevalley er support ee comments likheche ….. most probably Rosevalley er management er lokjon …. tara nejeder puro naamta likhte porjonto bhai pai ….. upnara kake biswas kore nijeder ato kosto kore rojgar kara taka 3 to 4 % besi interest er lobhe nasto korben.
Rosevalley colorful pamphlet chapeyee apnader chokhe rangeen chosma poreyee …… boka bananor chesta korche ……. mone rakhbeen …. lobhe paap ….. paapee mrityu ...
Deep Chanda
I am Dheeraj Mishra. I am working present real state sector. I am joining rose valley company. plz contact me . mobile no is [protected]. I have belong from allahabad.
This is not a emotionan film story, this is real life where money is everything,
And this co. doing this to earn money for them not for people(us). they cheated everyone... state govt. also them to cheat people, if govt want then take a strong step against then, but there is no response till date..
And this co. doing this to earn money for them not for people(us). they cheated everyone... state govt. also them to cheat people, if govt want then take a strong step against then, but there is no response till date..
I would like to comment that Rose Valley is not a fraud or cheat Company. I am working as an employee from 2006 n did nt find any scam. If anyone have doubt then you can see the website or visit the nearby offices of RoseValley. Trust and have faith in the Company and it will definately prove one day that it is one of the best company who care every investors.
hope all investors and depositors will support us
hope all investors and depositors will support us
As an employee of Rose Valley I firmly believe that our Co. will never cheat the investors as well as it's more than 5000 staffs who are working under the roof of Rose Valley and running their family from this earning.One thing all should keep in their mind that if we disbelieve on our Co. then how the Co. will go long run as we all should become the pillar of our Co.and take active part to grow our Co. And I personally respect a lot our Hon'ble Chairman Sir and our M.D. sir and strongly believe that they always think o[censored]s and all investors and they will not give the chance to let the Co. down in any way.So, be optimistic and have faith on your own Co.I always encourage everyone to continue their journey with Rose Valley.
Thank you all
Mrs.Sanchita Kar
Office Asst.Cum Computer Operator
Siliguri Regional Office.
Thank you all
Mrs.Sanchita Kar
Office Asst.Cum Computer Operator
Siliguri Regional Office.
I would like to inform you the people that there should be an authorisation certificate under section 45 (a) from the RBI, but I think Rose Valley has nothing like this. You should ask for this. If they show this certificate, then OK. you can continue with this company.
rose valley is not only good co. bt also it is developing dy by dy. perhaps this resion other co's agent being jellasy. so my dear agent friend.don't orry do hard work and trust ownself and co.
I don't know what is rose valley security .so can you tell me?
Mr. PRASHANT SARAN givin us a verry good information thanku verry mouch I hope u r the agent of rose valley
High Court rejects Rose Valley's writ petition against SEBI order
Kolkata, Mar 23 : Rose Valley Real Estate and Construction Company's writ petition challenging the January 3, order of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) was rejected by Calcutta High Court.
The SEBI had directed the company not to collect any money from investors or launch any scheme. It had also asked the firm not to dispose of any of its property in relation to the company’s collective investment scheme.
The SEBI had also alleged that the company had been mobilising deposits from the public to launch a Collective Investment Scheme without obtaining a certificate of registration from the board.
Justice Joyanta Biswas rejected the petition of Rose Valley Real Estate and Construction Company, saying it was not the appropriate forum to challenge the SEBI’s order .
Justice Biswas held that the company had the liberty to move an appeal before the Appellate forum of SEBI to oppose the order.
Earlier, the petitioner and counsels - P C Sen, S Pal and Sudipto Sarkar - told the bench of Justice Joyanta Biswas, ''As Rose Valley is not a listed one in any stock exchanges of the country, the SEBI has no jurisdiction to interfere with the affairs of the company. The affairs of the company are regulated and administered by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India as described under Company Act, 1956.'' The petitioner further said, ''The method of receiving money for allotment of plots or land to prospective buyers cannot be equated to collection of deposit from public or trading in the security market.'' ''The principal business of the company is real estate promotion and development of the same, '' the petitioner added.
Contesting the petitioner's submission, SEBI‘s counsel Hirak Sen had stated that the company violated regulations and ''collective investment scheme is a type of collection from public which the SEBI has power to regulate.''
Kolkata, Mar 23 : Rose Valley Real Estate and Construction Company's writ petition challenging the January 3, order of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) was rejected by Calcutta High Court.
The SEBI had directed the company not to collect any money from investors or launch any scheme. It had also asked the firm not to dispose of any of its property in relation to the company’s collective investment scheme.
The SEBI had also alleged that the company had been mobilising deposits from the public to launch a Collective Investment Scheme without obtaining a certificate of registration from the board.
Justice Joyanta Biswas rejected the petition of Rose Valley Real Estate and Construction Company, saying it was not the appropriate forum to challenge the SEBI’s order .
Justice Biswas held that the company had the liberty to move an appeal before the Appellate forum of SEBI to oppose the order.
Earlier, the petitioner and counsels - P C Sen, S Pal and Sudipto Sarkar - told the bench of Justice Joyanta Biswas, ''As Rose Valley is not a listed one in any stock exchanges of the country, the SEBI has no jurisdiction to interfere with the affairs of the company. The affairs of the company are regulated and administered by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India as described under Company Act, 1956.'' The petitioner further said, ''The method of receiving money for allotment of plots or land to prospective buyers cannot be equated to collection of deposit from public or trading in the security market.'' ''The principal business of the company is real estate promotion and development of the same, '' the petitioner added.
Contesting the petitioner's submission, SEBI‘s counsel Hirak Sen had stated that the company violated regulations and ''collective investment scheme is a type of collection from public which the SEBI has power to regulate.''
Rose Valley started there business in 1993 now 2011 the have business 17years already. Now Rose Valley becomes a no 1 company in money market. Rose Valley is Group of Companies is Doing Genuine and clean business in the market; our Company have business in 24 stats above 600+ branches with 16 regional offices in India. Rose Valley business in 17 profitable business sectors like hotel, product, film etc. you know Hotel business is a one time invest life time earning. Our management so strong. Those company go out from market they had not so branches they had not hotel, people don't know about the company where the office. They had business in a aria in small office, before living that type of company we don't have any news in a single paper. but Rose Valley come to the paper in front of the people, that men Rose Valley will be more solid in there legal aria. Keep your faith in our company u will get better result. So don't worried about this company, you will not be cheated by our company, so come and grow with us...
Regards,
Nanigopal Maity, 02C Unit
[protected], [protected]
Regards,
Nanigopal Maity, 02C Unit
[protected], [protected]
I wanted to invest in a recurring, for one year at Rose Vally Hotel and Entertainment @1250 per month.I filled up the relevant Form of the company which was brought by a agent and at the same time, I gave him 1250/-in cash and 5 PDC of SBI/AF Stn.Bkp.But unfortunately when I got the Certificate by Those agent, I saw he has made it for 5 years without my permission.I have only the money receipt in my hand.He has done it for greater rate of commision.how i can contact and lodge the complain to higher officials?.what is the E-mail address of Rose valley hotel and entertainment limiteds?should i complain to police, against that agent?
Pl mail me at: [protected]@rediffmail.com
Pl mail me at: [protected]@rediffmail.com
I HAVE SEEN THAT ROSE VALLEY HAS BEEN CLOSED BY SEBI.BUT NEXT DAY HAVE SEEN THE MD OF ROSE VALLEY HAS DECLAIRED THAT THE CO.IS ALWAYS OK.ACTUALY I DONT KNOW IS IT THE CIRCUS.IF GOVT.WANT TO CLOSE THEN HOW THE MD OF THESE CO DECALRED THE CO IS NOW OK .WHAT WILL BE DECISIONED THE PUBLIC YES OR NO.TODAY DECLARED ROSE VALLY IS NOT WAY TO INVEST NEXT DAY ANY BODY ANNOUNCE ALCHEMIST, SHARDA, TOWER GROUP, PRAYAG, BASIL ETC .ARE NOT COLLECTION BY THE GOVT.RULE.
I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS THE RULE TO COLLECT THE MONEY FROM INDIA.WHY ROC.CAN NOT MAKE A GROUP OF ASSOCIATES THAT LIKE A LIC SECTOR (IRDA).
I HAVE KNOWN IF THE CO WILL CHEAT THEN THE GOVT.WILL BE SHARE OF THE CHEAT FUND .
THE POOR MEN OR MIDDLE CLASS MEN HAVE DEPOSITED THEIR STRUGLING RUPESS IN THE PRIVATE SECTORS TO GET MUCH MOR INTERST .WHAT WILL BE THE CONDITION OF THEIR DEPOSIT MONEY? IF ANY BODY IS HE GOVT.EMPLOYEE OR PRIVATE EMPLOYEE DESCUSS OR MAIL ME THEN I SHLL BE VERY GREATFUL AS LIKE AS SOME UNLUCLY MEN WHO HAVE DEPOSIT THEIR MONEY THAT LIKE A LOT CHEAT FUND .
THANKING YOU
AWAITING OF YOUR MAIL.
BASUDEV JANA
[protected]
jana.[protected]@rediffmail.com