[Resolved] Dd City Faridabad — not allocated yet plots | |||
I have booked 200 square yard plot in upcoming project of dd city faridbad in 2006 and deposit rs 2, 95000.00 as initial deposit, four year has already passed and company is not bother to allot plots. There is a market roumer that company is trying to allot flats instead of plots and they are trying to sell the plots in very high rates as everyone know that due to metro and flyover there is huge jump in faridabad real estate company is trying to beefol the investors / persons who applied for plots and invest their hard earned money in search of house. I request all the depositiers to join hands and take legal action aganst this type of culprit companies Was this information helpful? | |||
Aug 13, 2020 Complaint marked as Resolved | |||
 266 Comments | |||
Comments
Yes, Now matter is hot. We can realise from planted persons comment that DD group is on back foot. I am with you. I was waiting for this moment. I will be there in high court. I have also got this letter and has told MR Kundan that i am not for refund. I want my plot. Let us start from hear.
Reply
bhayyia kisko plot mila aur kaise mila baki sab ko bhi bata do hum bhi plot le lenge ...sara jagda khtam ...ghambir ji apne ghar kush hum apne ghar khush
high court aked company to deposit amount with interest in bank just for bail, it means that they never order that investors have to accept refund with interest . as company already have license they have to allot plots . we have to fight against the company only for plots
mr ghambir ...u r very rich and respectable man, and i not met you but ppl tell me you are honest man and not a cheat..., so y so much confusion and chaos ...u have recieved the license pls mr ghambir please give us our plot...
there is a wrong posting in this forum that some people got plots . please beware from them .please not accept refund order with interest . they have already recorded wrong statement in EOW about compromise for acepting reund order since they got license and sold to another person . we have to file a case ( cheating ) against them . PUBLIC NOTICE IN TODAY TIMES OF INDIA PAGE 15 CLEARS THAT THOSE WHO INTERESTED( BUT NOT BOUND) TO ACCEPT REFUND PLEASE CONTACT THEM. AS THE RATE IN THE LAND WHERE THEY GOT LICENSE AND INVETORS DEPOSITD MONEY IS APPRECIATED . I REQUEST ALL THE INVESTORS TO ATTEND THE NEXT HEARING 29TH NOVEMBER 2011, SO THAT WE WILL TAKE DECESION FOR FURTHER ACTION . PLEASE NOT ACCEPT REFUND ORDERS
[protected]
[protected]
mr ghambir and mr tarun are not available at dd city office, so lets go to their homes and discuss the matter with them, does any one know their address ... somebody told me mr ghambir lives in west end and mr tarun lives in rajinder nagar ... if they dont talk to us we will sit on dharna outside thier house ...
They are not going to give us even 1foot of land with straight finger. We will have to move to court. come for EOW case hearing on 29th nov.
some touts are active on company behalf convencing investors to accept refund, please beware from them .
Sunil, Suzan, Raj and Pawan,
I would like to throw an open chamllenge to you. If any of you have got a plot in Faridabad, please share its location and number. All o[censored]s would love to visit and see your plot.
This group is for the Faridabad project and DD builders have not given a plot to anyone at all. They just got the license and sold off the license. NOT EVEN A SINGLE PLOT HAS BEEN GIVEN IN DD CITY FARIDABAD.
I dont know what personal reason you are praising DD City for but they certailny are fraudsters of the top level who have duped ALL buyers in Faridabad.
How come the DD team has been released now, a lawyer told me they have a warrant out for them in Faridabad and are to be arrested by Faridabad police.
Chetan
[protected]
I would like to throw an open chamllenge to you. If any of you have got a plot in Faridabad, please share its location and number. All o[censored]s would love to visit and see your plot.
This group is for the Faridabad project and DD builders have not given a plot to anyone at all. They just got the license and sold off the license. NOT EVEN A SINGLE PLOT HAS BEEN GIVEN IN DD CITY FARIDABAD.
I dont know what personal reason you are praising DD City for but they certailny are fraudsters of the top level who have duped ALL buyers in Faridabad.
How come the DD team has been released now, a lawyer told me they have a warrant out for them in Faridabad and are to be arrested by Faridabad police.
Chetan
[protected]
does somebody have of mr ghambir, mr tarun
Guys, I am looking for the group fighting the case in High court currently. Can anybody please provide me the phone number for any one of them. I believe we need to collectively see how we can get justice.
And a message to DD groups puppets posting praises for DD group in this forum. Everybody here has suffered and no one has been given a plot by DD in Faridabad.
chetan
[protected]
And a message to DD groups puppets posting praises for DD group in this forum. Everybody here has suffered and no one has been given a plot by DD in Faridabad.
chetan
[protected]
Content of the case hearing on 31st October 2011 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 1416/2011
REENA GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through Mr. Neeraj K. Kaul, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neraj Chaudhari and
Mr. B. Badrinath, Advocates.
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through Ms. Fizani Hussain, Addl.PP with SI Kumar Kundan from
EOW/Crime Branch
BAIL APPLN. 1417/2011
SANJAY GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari and
Mr. B. Badrinath, Advocates.
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through Ms. Fizani Hussain, Addl.PP with SI Kumar Kundan from
EOW/Crime Branch
BAIL APPLN. 1418/2011
KARAN GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari and
Mr. B. Badrinath, Advocates.
versus
STATE ... Respondent
Through Ms. Fizani Hussain, Addl.PP with SI Kumar Kundan from
EOW/Crime Branch
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA
O R D E R
31.10.2011
Arguments on the anticipatory bail have been heard at length.
Counsels for the petitioners state that there are 350 investors out
of which, 279 have already settled and a sum of Rs.13 Crore has already
been paid to those investors who have settled. It is further submitted that a retired High Court Judge has also been appointed by the
petitioners for looking into the genuine claims of the investors and for
settlement. It is also stated that out of 76 complainants 18 have already
settled and the petitioners are prepared to settle with the remaining
complainants as also the remaining investors along with interest as was
agreed in terms of the provisional allotment letter and the receipts
issued to the investors. It is also submitted that the petitioner Karan
Gambhir was a student at U.K. whereas the petitioner Reena Gambhir was a
housewife who had no concerns with the company.
On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
complainants that the number of investors was much more than 350 and that
the terms in the receipts and also the provisional allotment letters
which are stipulated without there being any consent of the investors.
They also submitted that the petitioners did not have valid licence for
the projects for which investors were called by way of advertisements
inviting public to invest therein.
It has also been submitted that the amount was not Rs. 3 Crore as
is sought to be represented by the petitioners but much more keeping in
view a large number of the investors.
With regard to Karan Gambhir and Reena Gambhir, it has been
submitted that Reena Gambhir is Director in 28 companies and Karan
Gambhir was also Director in many companies since 2005. It is also
submitted by learned counsel for the complainants that there are several
FIRs against the petitioners at several places throughout the country
such as Zirakpur, Mohali, Sonepat, Faridabad, Ahmedabad etc with regard
to various projects launched by them. It has been further submitted that
even the petitioners have investments from some investors as back as in
2010. It is next submitted that what was paid by the investors was not
the advance money but installments towards the projects for which they
have booked the plots. Not only that, even the petitioners have charged
transfer charges. Reference is made to a receipt dated 13th January,
2010 in this regard issued in the name of Vandana Gupta.
It is submitted by learned APP that the licence at the Faridabad
Project was issued only in 2010 whereas booking was started by the
petitioners in 2005. It is submitted that however there was no licence
even till date with regard to the Zirakpur project which was launched by
the petitioners and for which various investors have made investments. It
is also submitted by learned APP on the instructions of I.O. that till
date total number of investors have not been informed by the petitioners.
Keeping in view all that has been noted above, before proceeding to
pass appropriate orders on the arguments as addressed by the counsels, it
would be necessary to know the number of investors and the total amount
of investment that has been made by them towards various projects
launched by the petitioners in different parts of the country. The
petitioners will submit the details of these investors on affidavit along
with amounts of investments and the dates of investments/installments
within one week from today.
Now it was proposed by learned counsel for the complainants that if the petitioners are honest, they must come out with some advertisement in
the daily newspapers so that all the investors in the projects may know
about the projects having failed or scrapped or being unable to be
executed by the petitioners.
The counsels for the petitioners have agreed to this proposal.
Based on this, the petitioners will prepare an advertisement to be shown
to the counsel for the complainant within three days from today.
The matter will be taken up again on 4th November, 2011.
M.L. MEHTA, J
OCTOBER 31, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 1416/2011
REENA GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through Mr. Neeraj K. Kaul, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neraj Chaudhari and
Mr. B. Badrinath, Advocates.
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through Ms. Fizani Hussain, Addl.PP with SI Kumar Kundan from
EOW/Crime Branch
BAIL APPLN. 1417/2011
SANJAY GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari and
Mr. B. Badrinath, Advocates.
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through Ms. Fizani Hussain, Addl.PP with SI Kumar Kundan from
EOW/Crime Branch
BAIL APPLN. 1418/2011
KARAN GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari and
Mr. B. Badrinath, Advocates.
versus
STATE ... Respondent
Through Ms. Fizani Hussain, Addl.PP with SI Kumar Kundan from
EOW/Crime Branch
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA
O R D E R
31.10.2011
Arguments on the anticipatory bail have been heard at length.
Counsels for the petitioners state that there are 350 investors out
of which, 279 have already settled and a sum of Rs.13 Crore has already
been paid to those investors who have settled. It is further submitted that a retired High Court Judge has also been appointed by the
petitioners for looking into the genuine claims of the investors and for
settlement. It is also stated that out of 76 complainants 18 have already
settled and the petitioners are prepared to settle with the remaining
complainants as also the remaining investors along with interest as was
agreed in terms of the provisional allotment letter and the receipts
issued to the investors. It is also submitted that the petitioner Karan
Gambhir was a student at U.K. whereas the petitioner Reena Gambhir was a
housewife who had no concerns with the company.
On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
complainants that the number of investors was much more than 350 and that
the terms in the receipts and also the provisional allotment letters
which are stipulated without there being any consent of the investors.
They also submitted that the petitioners did not have valid licence for
the projects for which investors were called by way of advertisements
inviting public to invest therein.
It has also been submitted that the amount was not Rs. 3 Crore as
is sought to be represented by the petitioners but much more keeping in
view a large number of the investors.
With regard to Karan Gambhir and Reena Gambhir, it has been
submitted that Reena Gambhir is Director in 28 companies and Karan
Gambhir was also Director in many companies since 2005. It is also
submitted by learned counsel for the complainants that there are several
FIRs against the petitioners at several places throughout the country
such as Zirakpur, Mohali, Sonepat, Faridabad, Ahmedabad etc with regard
to various projects launched by them. It has been further submitted that
even the petitioners have investments from some investors as back as in
2010. It is next submitted that what was paid by the investors was not
the advance money but installments towards the projects for which they
have booked the plots. Not only that, even the petitioners have charged
transfer charges. Reference is made to a receipt dated 13th January,
2010 in this regard issued in the name of Vandana Gupta.
It is submitted by learned APP that the licence at the Faridabad
Project was issued only in 2010 whereas booking was started by the
petitioners in 2005. It is submitted that however there was no licence
even till date with regard to the Zirakpur project which was launched by
the petitioners and for which various investors have made investments. It
is also submitted by learned APP on the instructions of I.O. that till
date total number of investors have not been informed by the petitioners.
Keeping in view all that has been noted above, before proceeding to
pass appropriate orders on the arguments as addressed by the counsels, it
would be necessary to know the number of investors and the total amount
of investment that has been made by them towards various projects
launched by the petitioners in different parts of the country. The
petitioners will submit the details of these investors on affidavit along
with amounts of investments and the dates of investments/installments
within one week from today.
Now it was proposed by learned counsel for the complainants that if the petitioners are honest, they must come out with some advertisement in
the daily newspapers so that all the investors in the projects may know
about the projects having failed or scrapped or being unable to be
executed by the petitioners.
The counsels for the petitioners have agreed to this proposal.
Based on this, the petitioners will prepare an advertisement to be shown
to the counsel for the complainant within three days from today.
The matter will be taken up again on 4th November, 2011.
M.L. MEHTA, J
OCTOBER 31, 2011
I made booking of 2 plots in DD Group, s SAS Nagar, Mohali Project in the year 2006. Since they have not got any license for their Mohali project so I requested them to refund my payment with interest. Company issued me PDC of different dates from April-2011 to July-2011. These cheques have been dishonored and returned to me by my bank mentionion "Account Blocked".
On 18 Aug, I informed Mr Sanjay Gambhir, MD about above dihonored cheques and told him that i would have to take legal action if i didnt get my money within a week. He assured me that I would get my money by 15th Sept. since then I am just following up for refund of my payment but getting future dates not my payment.
I have also made a complaint in EOW and they have attached my complaint with FIR no. 75/11 P.S.
I too want to join you people if i can be helpful in getting any justice to you. My Mobile no. [protected]
On 18 Aug, I informed Mr Sanjay Gambhir, MD about above dihonored cheques and told him that i would have to take legal action if i didnt get my money within a week. He assured me that I would get my money by 15th Sept. since then I am just following up for refund of my payment but getting future dates not my payment.
I have also made a complaint in EOW and they have attached my complaint with FIR no. 75/11 P.S.
I too want to join you people if i can be helpful in getting any justice to you. My Mobile no. [protected]
Request all the DD sufferer to meet on 29th november at Delhi High Court.
[censored]al -[protected]
[censored]al -[protected]
PLEASE POST GATE NUMBER AND ROOM NUMBER OF DELHI HIGH COURT, SO THAT WE CAN MEET
outcome of hearing 29 november 2011
we shud collect details of properties of directors of dd city and get them auctioned by court ...
agreed with you even i got my claim back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 1416/2011
REENA GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
Neraj Chaudhari and Mr. B.
Badrinath, Advocates
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through: Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for State with
SI Kumar Kundan from EOW/
Crime Branch
Mr. Saheel Sarwar Wani and Mr. Akhil
Sibal, Advocates for complainants
/investors
And
BAIL APPLN. 1417/2011
SANJAY GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari and
Mr. B. Badrinath, Advocates
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through: Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for State with
SI Kumar Kundan from EOW/ Crime
Branch
And
BAIL APPLN. 1418/2011
KARAN GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Advocate with Mr.
Neeraj Chaudhari and Mr. B.
Badrinath, Advocates
versus
STATE ... Respondent
Through: Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for State with
SI Kumar Kundan from EOW/
Crime Branch
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA
O R D E R
04.11.2011
Arguments on the above bail applications heard further.
Mr. Akhil Sibbal, Advocate representing some of the investors
states that the investors represented by him are interested in refund of
the money with interest immediately. With all this, we have seen that
some of the investors are interested in refund of the money with
interest. However, some of the investors are interested for the land
which was booked by them with the petitioners in Faridabad, Zirakpur,
Mohali and Sonepat and they are not interested in taking the refund with
interest. Similarly, one set of investors represented by Shri S.S. Wani,
Advocate, state that they are interested in money with interest and the
other set of investors are interested in land.
Learned APP again maintains that keeping in view the seriousness of
the nature of offence committed by the petitioners and that since the
huge amount of Rs.112 crore taken by the petitioners company from FDI
needs to be investigated, the petitioners be not granted bail.
Keeping in view the entire scenario and the factual matrix of the
case and also the contentions of learned counsel for the investors as
well as keeping in view the interest of the investors and the paramount
interest of investigation of offences, I am of the considered view that
some mechanism needs to be evolved so that the investors who are
interested in taking their moneys back with interest on account of
various reasons, may be because of dire need of the money, be not
deprived of their money any longer. The mechanism which is sought to be
evolved will also not prejudice either the investors or the seriousness
and gravity of the allegations being leveled against the petitioners and
the alleged offences committed by the petitioners. As such, it is
directed as under:
(i) The advertisements will be taken out by the petitioners in all the
National daily newspapers of English, Hindi, Punjabi in circulation in
Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Delhi and UP. It is informed that the
newspapers in circulation in these areas are Times of India, Hindustan
Times, Tribune, Punjab Kesri, Amar Ujala, Dainik Jagran, Rajasthan
Patrika, Rashtriya Sahara, Dainik Bhaskar and Navbharat Times (Hindi Edition). In the proposed contents of publication given by the
petitioners some modifications were made by the investors? counsels. The
same will be veted by this Court and handed over to the petitioners. The
publication will be taken out in all the above newspapers at the costs
and expenses of the petitioners for 9.11.2011. Steps in this regard will
be taken by the petitioners immediately and latest by tomorrow i.e.
5.11.2011.
(ii) Shri Bharat Parashar, Joint Registrar of this Court is hereby
appointed as Court Commissioner. The petitioners will open a saving
account in UCO Bank of this Court and make initial deposit of Rs.2.5
crore therein by tomorrow and Rs.2.5 crore on 9.11.2011. The investors/
claimants would be entitled to be given refund of their claims/
investments with interest from this account by way of pay orders/bankers?
cheques to be got made by the Court Commissioner.
(iii) The petitioners will ensure that a minimum balance of Rs.1 crore
will remain in that account at all the time till further orders. The
Court Commissioner would be empowered to direct the petitioners to make
more deposits as and when the demands of the investors for refund rise.
He will, however, ensure that a minimum of Rs.1 crore shall always remain
in the said account till further orders. The refund will be got made by
the Court Commissioner from UCO Bank by way of pay order/bankers cheque
after due verification in the names of the claimants/ investors.
(iv) The Court Commissioner will be satisfying the claims of the
investors while making refund orders in their names from the documents
that may be submitted by the investors to his satisfaction.
(v) The Court Commissioner will be at liberty to seek any further
clarification or modifications from the undersigned in the Chamber as and
when needed with regard to the difficulties that may be faced by him in
implementing the mechanism.
In view of the above, the petitioners shall not be arrested till
further orders. However, the petitioners shall join and cooperate in the
investigation and shall report to the IO on 5.11.2011 at 3 pm. With this
additional work that may be assigned to the Court Commissioner, he would
have to devote his extra time after and over his working hours, this
Court is of the view, and as is proposed by learned counsel for the
parties, some remuneration need to be paid to the Court Commissioner for
doing additional and overtime work, which shall be assessed by this Court
after sometime.
The list of investors and affidavits as directed by this Court on
the last date of hearing have been given by the petitioners under the
seal cover which has been perused and put back in the seal cover. Copy
of the that list may be given by the petitioners to the IO also.
All this is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the
parties in their criminal as well as in civil cases.
List on 29.11.2011.
Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Court
master.
M.L. MEHTA, J
NOVEMBER 04, 2011
rd
$ 10
BAIL APPLN. 1416/2011
REENA GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
Neraj Chaudhari and Mr. B.
Badrinath, Advocates
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through: Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for State with
SI Kumar Kundan from EOW/
Crime Branch
Mr. Saheel Sarwar Wani and Mr. Akhil
Sibal, Advocates for complainants
/investors
And
BAIL APPLN. 1417/2011
SANJAY GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari and
Mr. B. Badrinath, Advocates
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent
Through: Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for State with
SI Kumar Kundan from EOW/ Crime
Branch
And
BAIL APPLN. 1418/2011
KARAN GAMBHIR ... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Advocate with Mr.
Neeraj Chaudhari and Mr. B.
Badrinath, Advocates
versus
STATE ... Respondent
Through: Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for State with
SI Kumar Kundan from EOW/
Crime Branch
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA
O R D E R
04.11.2011
Arguments on the above bail applications heard further.
Mr. Akhil Sibbal, Advocate representing some of the investors
states that the investors represented by him are interested in refund of
the money with interest immediately. With all this, we have seen that
some of the investors are interested in refund of the money with
interest. However, some of the investors are interested for the land
which was booked by them with the petitioners in Faridabad, Zirakpur,
Mohali and Sonepat and they are not interested in taking the refund with
interest. Similarly, one set of investors represented by Shri S.S. Wani,
Advocate, state that they are interested in money with interest and the
other set of investors are interested in land.
Learned APP again maintains that keeping in view the seriousness of
the nature of offence committed by the petitioners and that since the
huge amount of Rs.112 crore taken by the petitioners company from FDI
needs to be investigated, the petitioners be not granted bail.
Keeping in view the entire scenario and the factual matrix of the
case and also the contentions of learned counsel for the investors as
well as keeping in view the interest of the investors and the paramount
interest of investigation of offences, I am of the considered view that
some mechanism needs to be evolved so that the investors who are
interested in taking their moneys back with interest on account of
various reasons, may be because of dire need of the money, be not
deprived of their money any longer. The mechanism which is sought to be
evolved will also not prejudice either the investors or the seriousness
and gravity of the allegations being leveled against the petitioners and
the alleged offences committed by the petitioners. As such, it is
directed as under:
(i) The advertisements will be taken out by the petitioners in all the
National daily newspapers of English, Hindi, Punjabi in circulation in
Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Delhi and UP. It is informed that the
newspapers in circulation in these areas are Times of India, Hindustan
Times, Tribune, Punjab Kesri, Amar Ujala, Dainik Jagran, Rajasthan
Patrika, Rashtriya Sahara, Dainik Bhaskar and Navbharat Times (Hindi Edition). In the proposed contents of publication given by the
petitioners some modifications were made by the investors? counsels. The
same will be veted by this Court and handed over to the petitioners. The
publication will be taken out in all the above newspapers at the costs
and expenses of the petitioners for 9.11.2011. Steps in this regard will
be taken by the petitioners immediately and latest by tomorrow i.e.
5.11.2011.
(ii) Shri Bharat Parashar, Joint Registrar of this Court is hereby
appointed as Court Commissioner. The petitioners will open a saving
account in UCO Bank of this Court and make initial deposit of Rs.2.5
crore therein by tomorrow and Rs.2.5 crore on 9.11.2011. The investors/
claimants would be entitled to be given refund of their claims/
investments with interest from this account by way of pay orders/bankers?
cheques to be got made by the Court Commissioner.
(iii) The petitioners will ensure that a minimum balance of Rs.1 crore
will remain in that account at all the time till further orders. The
Court Commissioner would be empowered to direct the petitioners to make
more deposits as and when the demands of the investors for refund rise.
He will, however, ensure that a minimum of Rs.1 crore shall always remain
in the said account till further orders. The refund will be got made by
the Court Commissioner from UCO Bank by way of pay order/bankers cheque
after due verification in the names of the claimants/ investors.
(iv) The Court Commissioner will be satisfying the claims of the
investors while making refund orders in their names from the documents
that may be submitted by the investors to his satisfaction.
(v) The Court Commissioner will be at liberty to seek any further
clarification or modifications from the undersigned in the Chamber as and
when needed with regard to the difficulties that may be faced by him in
implementing the mechanism.
In view of the above, the petitioners shall not be arrested till
further orders. However, the petitioners shall join and cooperate in the
investigation and shall report to the IO on 5.11.2011 at 3 pm. With this
additional work that may be assigned to the Court Commissioner, he would
have to devote his extra time after and over his working hours, this
Court is of the view, and as is proposed by learned counsel for the
parties, some remuneration need to be paid to the Court Commissioner for
doing additional and overtime work, which shall be assessed by this Court
after sometime.
The list of investors and affidavits as directed by this Court on
the last date of hearing have been given by the petitioners under the
seal cover which has been perused and put back in the seal cover. Copy
of the that list may be given by the petitioners to the IO also.
All this is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the
parties in their criminal as well as in civil cases.
List on 29.11.2011.
Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Court
master.
M.L. MEHTA, J
NOVEMBER 04, 2011
rd
$ 10
next date 22/12/11