[Resolved] Rose Valley Chain Marketing System — collecting money agenst RD scheme | |
I know rose vally is a corporate agent of LIC OF INDIA they sell the products of LIC but i found they sell RD and FD scheme and the collecting money can not deposit in LIC they r use the money to develop their own business, my question is 1.What is the Balance sheet of last 3 years. 2. There is any rating by any institution like AAA, A+ 3. and big question is if i deposit 500, 000/- and the company faliure so what happened, RBI or any Govt institution bound to pay me my amount with interest, how much safe i am. and what is your suggession Was this information helpful? | |
Aug 13, 2020 Complaint marked as Resolved | |
 32 Comments | |
Comments
is rose velly still now a lic agent
Reply
I received Rs. 900/- by cheque. Cheque No.006393 on dated of 17/11/2003. But This cheque has lost. So I could not received payment of this cheque. Therefore I request You that you renew this Cheque again and send me following address-:
Name-: Prithviraj Singh
Address-: Hata Peer Ali Bazariya, Farrukhabad (U.P.)209625.
So I requested that You send me your answer immediately.
Thanking You,
Name-: Prithviraj Singh
Address-: Hata Peer Ali Bazariya, Farrukhabad (U.P.)209625.
So I requested that You send me your answer immediately.
Thanking You,
Investment(Chain System) — To Renew The Cheque
I received Rs.900/- by ICICI bank cheque no. 006393 dated on 17/11/2003. But this Cheque has lost.So I Could not received payment of this Cheque. Therefore I requested that You sent me a above renew Cheque following address-:Name-: Prithviraj Singh
Address-: Hata Peer Ali Bazariya, Farrukhabad (U.P.) 209625.
Please give me your response immediately in favour of my complaint.
Thanking You.
Date-: 25/02/2010
i know rose vally is a sister concern of lici but am also victim member. am really feared of my policy.
I know rose vally is a corporate agent of LIC OF INDIA they sell the products of LIC but i found they sell RD and FD scheme and the collecting money can not deposit in LIC they r use the money to develop their own business, my question is 1.What is the Balance sheet of last 3 years. 2. There is any rating by any institution like AAA, A+ 3. and big question is if i deposit 500, 000/- and the company faliure so what happened, RBI or any Govt institution bound to pay me my amount with interest, how much safe i am. and what is your suggession
i am agree with u all. i also doubt Rose valley chain marketing system
my name is gangadhar choudhary taken rose valley hotel & entertainment,
i don't konw how to check my balance or invested amount is rose valley,
help me wht to do.?
i don't konw how to check my balance or invested amount is rose valley,
help me wht to do.?
Bench: G Bajpai
Sebi vs Rose Valley Resorts And Plantations Ltd. on 24/12/2002
JUDGMENT
G.N. Bajpai, Chairman
1. M/s Rose Valley Resorts and Plantations Ltd., Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the company) filed certain
information/details with SEBI regarding its collective investment schemes pursuant to SEBI's Press Release
dated 26.11.1997 and Public Notice dated 18.12.1997.
2. Pursuant to the notification of SEBI (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations, 1999 (hereinafter
referred to as the said Regulations) on 15.10.1999 the company submitted an application for the grant of
provisional registration with SEBI. As the details submitted by the company were not found to be satisfactory
it was given a personal hearing before the then SEBI Chairman on 18.12.2000 wherein the company was
directed to submit the following declaration / certificates to the satisfaction of SEBI for further processing of
its application:
3. Certificate from their present statutory auditors (since the previous declaration was from the previous
statutory auditor who was subsequently replaced by the applicant company) stating that:
all the monies raised by the company under the collective investment schemes have been utilized for the
purposes mentioned in the scheme brochures of the applicant; and
all the amounts due to the investors under the collective investment schemes of the applicant have been duly
paid to the investors on the prescribed dates.
4. Networth certificate from their present statutory auditors.
5. Copy of the resolution in respect of change in statutory auditors, passed at the General Meeting of the
company.
6. Certificate from the company stating that they have not mobilized money from the public apart from their
collective investment schemes.
7. The company however, did not comply with all the said directions.
8. Rather the company preferred a Writ Petition No. 18809(W)/2001 before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court
which vide its order dated 28.01.2002 directed SEBI to consider the company's application for grant of
provisional registration in accordance with law and come to a final decision in a period of six weeks from the
date of communication of the order by the company. The Hon'ble Court further clarified that SEBI would be
at liberty to call for any information / report from the Police Authorities against the company.
9. The said order of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court was however communicated by the company to SEBI on
20.02.2002. Accordingly, the company was granted another opportunity of personal hearing before Chairman,
SEBI on 27.02.2002 wherein the company was directed to submit the following documents by 15.03.2002:
1. Certificate from the Statutory Auditors of the company stating that:
(a) All the monies raised by the company under its collective investment schemes have been utilized for the
purposes mentioned in the scheme brochures of the applicant; and
Sebi vs Rose Valley Resorts And ... on 24 December, 2002
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1059191/ 1(b) all the amounts due to the investors under the collective investment schemes of the applicant have been
duly paid to the investors on the prescribed dates.
Certificate from the Statutory Auditors of the company stating that they have not mobilized money from the
public apart from their collective investment schemes.
3. Certificate from the Statutory Auditors of the company stating that no funds have been mobilized by the
company after 15.10.1999, i.e. the date of notification of the SEBI (CIS) Regulations, 1999.
4. Certificate from the Statutory Auditor of the company in respect of the full address, total area and
ownership details of the plantation site of the company.
5. Certificate from the Statutory Auditors of the company confirming that the funds mobilized by the
company have been fully utilized towards development of the plantation site of the company.
10. However, the company did not file all the required documents within the stipulated period i.e.,
15.03.2002.
11. Pursuant to the provisions of Regulation 70(2) of the said Regulations, SEBI decided to conduct
inspection of the scheme(s) / books of accounts of the company from March 11, 2002. However, the company
refused to produce any books of accounts before the auditors appointed by SEBI for the purposes of
inspection and because of the non co-operation on the part of the company, the said auditors could not carry
out the said inspection.
12. Since the company did not submit the required documents / information within the stipulated time and
keeping in view the non co-operation with the auditors in the course of inspection of the scheme(s) / books of
accounts of the company, SEBI has taken a view that the company has failed to satisfy SEBI that its affairs
are not being conducted in the manner detrimental to the existing investors and therefore, rejected the
application for the grant of registration on March 27, 2002/April 2, 2002.
13. While communicating the grounds of rejection of the application on March 27, 2002/April 2, 2002 it was
also informed to the company that pursuant to the rejection of the application, the company, as an existing
Collective Investment Scheme, is required to wind up its existing scheme(s) and make repayment to the
investors in the manner specified in Regulation 73 of the said Regulations.
14. Accordingly, the company was required to send an Information Memorandum to the investors, who have
subscribed to its scheme(s), within two months from the date of receipt of intimation from SEBI i.e., March
27, 2002/April 2, 2002. Further on completion of winding up and repayment to the investors in the manner
specified in Regulation 73 the company was required to file a "Winding up and Repayment Report" in the
format prescribed by SEBI so as to reach SEBI within three and half months from the date of Information
Memorandum i.e., September 17, 2002.
15. However, the company has failed to comply with the aforesaid requirements of the Regulations and
therefore has prima facie violated the provisions of Section 12(1B) of SEBI Act read with Regulation 73 of
the said Regulations.
16. Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred upon me under Section 11B read with Section 4(3) of
SEBI Act and Regulation 65 of the said Regulations, I hereby direct the company to refund the money
collected under the scheme(s) with returns which is due to the investors as per the terms of the offer within a
period of one month from the date of this order failing which the following actions would follow:
Sebi vs Rose Valley Resorts And ... on 24 December, 2002
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1059191/ 21. Initiation of prosecution proceedings under Section 24 of SEBI Act, 1992 against the company / its
promoters / its directors / its managers / persons in charge of the business of its scheme(s).
2. The company / its promoters / its directors / its managers / persons in charge of the business of its
scheme(s) would be debarred from operating in the capital market and from accessing the capital market for a
period of 5 years.
3. Writing to the state government / local police to register civil / criminal cases against the company and its
promoters / directors for apparent offences of fraud, cheating, criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of
public funds.
4. Writing to the Department of Company Affairs to initiate the process of winding up of the company.
Sebi vs Rose Valley Resorts And ... on 24 December, 2002
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1059191/ 3
Sebi vs Rose Valley Resorts And Plantations Ltd. on 24/12/2002
JUDGMENT
G.N. Bajpai, Chairman
1. M/s Rose Valley Resorts and Plantations Ltd., Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the company) filed certain
information/details with SEBI regarding its collective investment schemes pursuant to SEBI's Press Release
dated 26.11.1997 and Public Notice dated 18.12.1997.
2. Pursuant to the notification of SEBI (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations, 1999 (hereinafter
referred to as the said Regulations) on 15.10.1999 the company submitted an application for the grant of
provisional registration with SEBI. As the details submitted by the company were not found to be satisfactory
it was given a personal hearing before the then SEBI Chairman on 18.12.2000 wherein the company was
directed to submit the following declaration / certificates to the satisfaction of SEBI for further processing of
its application:
3. Certificate from their present statutory auditors (since the previous declaration was from the previous
statutory auditor who was subsequently replaced by the applicant company) stating that:
all the monies raised by the company under the collective investment schemes have been utilized for the
purposes mentioned in the scheme brochures of the applicant; and
all the amounts due to the investors under the collective investment schemes of the applicant have been duly
paid to the investors on the prescribed dates.
4. Networth certificate from their present statutory auditors.
5. Copy of the resolution in respect of change in statutory auditors, passed at the General Meeting of the
company.
6. Certificate from the company stating that they have not mobilized money from the public apart from their
collective investment schemes.
7. The company however, did not comply with all the said directions.
8. Rather the company preferred a Writ Petition No. 18809(W)/2001 before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court
which vide its order dated 28.01.2002 directed SEBI to consider the company's application for grant of
provisional registration in accordance with law and come to a final decision in a period of six weeks from the
date of communication of the order by the company. The Hon'ble Court further clarified that SEBI would be
at liberty to call for any information / report from the Police Authorities against the company.
9. The said order of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court was however communicated by the company to SEBI on
20.02.2002. Accordingly, the company was granted another opportunity of personal hearing before Chairman,
SEBI on 27.02.2002 wherein the company was directed to submit the following documents by 15.03.2002:
1. Certificate from the Statutory Auditors of the company stating that:
(a) All the monies raised by the company under its collective investment schemes have been utilized for the
purposes mentioned in the scheme brochures of the applicant; and
Sebi vs Rose Valley Resorts And ... on 24 December, 2002
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1059191/ 1(b) all the amounts due to the investors under the collective investment schemes of the applicant have been
duly paid to the investors on the prescribed dates.
Certificate from the Statutory Auditors of the company stating that they have not mobilized money from the
public apart from their collective investment schemes.
3. Certificate from the Statutory Auditors of the company stating that no funds have been mobilized by the
company after 15.10.1999, i.e. the date of notification of the SEBI (CIS) Regulations, 1999.
4. Certificate from the Statutory Auditor of the company in respect of the full address, total area and
ownership details of the plantation site of the company.
5. Certificate from the Statutory Auditors of the company confirming that the funds mobilized by the
company have been fully utilized towards development of the plantation site of the company.
10. However, the company did not file all the required documents within the stipulated period i.e.,
15.03.2002.
11. Pursuant to the provisions of Regulation 70(2) of the said Regulations, SEBI decided to conduct
inspection of the scheme(s) / books of accounts of the company from March 11, 2002. However, the company
refused to produce any books of accounts before the auditors appointed by SEBI for the purposes of
inspection and because of the non co-operation on the part of the company, the said auditors could not carry
out the said inspection.
12. Since the company did not submit the required documents / information within the stipulated time and
keeping in view the non co-operation with the auditors in the course of inspection of the scheme(s) / books of
accounts of the company, SEBI has taken a view that the company has failed to satisfy SEBI that its affairs
are not being conducted in the manner detrimental to the existing investors and therefore, rejected the
application for the grant of registration on March 27, 2002/April 2, 2002.
13. While communicating the grounds of rejection of the application on March 27, 2002/April 2, 2002 it was
also informed to the company that pursuant to the rejection of the application, the company, as an existing
Collective Investment Scheme, is required to wind up its existing scheme(s) and make repayment to the
investors in the manner specified in Regulation 73 of the said Regulations.
14. Accordingly, the company was required to send an Information Memorandum to the investors, who have
subscribed to its scheme(s), within two months from the date of receipt of intimation from SEBI i.e., March
27, 2002/April 2, 2002. Further on completion of winding up and repayment to the investors in the manner
specified in Regulation 73 the company was required to file a "Winding up and Repayment Report" in the
format prescribed by SEBI so as to reach SEBI within three and half months from the date of Information
Memorandum i.e., September 17, 2002.
15. However, the company has failed to comply with the aforesaid requirements of the Regulations and
therefore has prima facie violated the provisions of Section 12(1B) of SEBI Act read with Regulation 73 of
the said Regulations.
16. Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred upon me under Section 11B read with Section 4(3) of
SEBI Act and Regulation 65 of the said Regulations, I hereby direct the company to refund the money
collected under the scheme(s) with returns which is due to the investors as per the terms of the offer within a
period of one month from the date of this order failing which the following actions would follow:
Sebi vs Rose Valley Resorts And ... on 24 December, 2002
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1059191/ 21. Initiation of prosecution proceedings under Section 24 of SEBI Act, 1992 against the company / its
promoters / its directors / its managers / persons in charge of the business of its scheme(s).
2. The company / its promoters / its directors / its managers / persons in charge of the business of its
scheme(s) would be debarred from operating in the capital market and from accessing the capital market for a
period of 5 years.
3. Writing to the state government / local police to register civil / criminal cases against the company and its
promoters / directors for apparent offences of fraud, cheating, criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of
public funds.
4. Writing to the Department of Company Affairs to initiate the process of winding up of the company.
Sebi vs Rose Valley Resorts And ... on 24 December, 2002
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1059191/ 3
i want know rose about valley company that is company true and false
rose valley company is good or bad. tell me
ROSE VALLEY COMPANY IS GIVEN MATURITY MONEY AT ASSAM SPECIALLY AT SONITPUR DISTRICT. THE AGENTS ARE LEFT FROM THERE HOUSE.
what is the future of rose valley and how it is secured .i want to know the company investing in which items...e mail id-subashcom.[protected]@rediffmail.com...mobile-[protected] .
all recurring deposit company — why not check out
R/sir,i want to complaint that rbi ,irda,sebi and try are the govt.organisations.irda is doing many modifications in insurance industry like fee inhancment and many good restrictons to save and grow public money improving licensing process etc,but no check out is seen against recuring deposit pvt ltd and ltd companies which are collecting a huge money from public and use their money in real estate transaction,which are very risky.I want to ask one question that if these types of real estate companies which are collecting a huge money,it get fail and say itself insolvent then who will return that huge public money to public.Perhaps everyone remember the one same case of The golden forest real estate case,which is still pending and no money is retured to public...what is the safety and assurance of return back money to public in future of that real estate companies....think what can happen in case of loss of property and money of these reak estate companies--???????????????????????????????? hi myself Sushil kumar Shaw & i am working in Rose Valley as a agent . i am happy with rose vally. But i want to clear one thing about the below description:
" if i deposit 100, 000/- and the company faliure so what happened, RBI or any Govt institution bound to pay me my amount with interest, how much safe i am. and what is your suggession "
" if i deposit 100, 000/- and the company faliure so what happened, RBI or any Govt institution bound to pay me my amount with interest, how much safe i am. and what is your suggession "
Rose valley is providing schemes of FD & RD, where they are claiming of very high returns. How safe are these investment from investors point of view. Is rose valley is authorized by RBI for accepting such deposits from the public? Whether they have taken any license from RBI for the same? Kindly clarify the above issues.
Hi this is sanjoy Dutta ( 02c unit, raniganj br, burdwan ) Sir, may i request you pls do the arranged to online at our all rose valley branchs. & also provide the latest result of sebi vs rose valley case.
email= [protected]@yahoo.in
email= [protected]@yahoo.in
Rose valley is no longer collecting money for Fixed deposit and Recurring Deposit from public against allotment of land because Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), the regulatory body has stopped the company from doing so since last year.
Rose Valley owns about 25 Hotels and resorts in different locations in India. The company is still accepting Fixed deposit and Recurring Deposit from public against advance booking of Hotel rooms. If the investor does not occupy the hotel room within next three or five years, on cancellation of booking they are refunded their original investment with interest which is higher than the bank rate. They have 14 lakh agents who collect these deposits through chain system against commission. Total commission distributed is more than 40 % of collection. Do they need permission from RBI or SEBI to run this sort of business. Majority of investors do not occupy hotel rooms. They want return on their investment which doubles after 5 years and 10 months. which is earlier than bank . This is the main attraction for the public. if the company fails to give maturity payment, then RBI or SEBI will not help the investors because the company claims that they are not bank and hence not controlled by RBI. BUt the question is, If they are not bank then why they are allowed to operate like a bank and colled RD, FD and MIS. Government should wake uo in the interest of public. Like Rose Valley there are hundreds of companies doing similar business in West Bengal. Some of these companies have already vanished from the market with crores of rupees public money CTVN Plus Channel is showing a programme called "CHIT FUND" every friday evening at 9 p.m. or 9, 30 p.m. Everybody must watch.
Rose Valley owns about 25 Hotels and resorts in different locations in India. The company is still accepting Fixed deposit and Recurring Deposit from public against advance booking of Hotel rooms. If the investor does not occupy the hotel room within next three or five years, on cancellation of booking they are refunded their original investment with interest which is higher than the bank rate. They have 14 lakh agents who collect these deposits through chain system against commission. Total commission distributed is more than 40 % of collection. Do they need permission from RBI or SEBI to run this sort of business. Majority of investors do not occupy hotel rooms. They want return on their investment which doubles after 5 years and 10 months. which is earlier than bank . This is the main attraction for the public. if the company fails to give maturity payment, then RBI or SEBI will not help the investors because the company claims that they are not bank and hence not controlled by RBI. BUt the question is, If they are not bank then why they are allowed to operate like a bank and colled RD, FD and MIS. Government should wake uo in the interest of public. Like Rose Valley there are hundreds of companies doing similar business in West Bengal. Some of these companies have already vanished from the market with crores of rupees public money CTVN Plus Channel is showing a programme called "CHIT FUND" every friday evening at 9 p.m. or 9, 30 p.m. Everybody must watch.
I am a agent of ROSE VALLEY CHAIN MARKETING SYSTEM.and i am working full time with this company.Though I want to know how much secure the public money and my Carrier ?