SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(SC) 229

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.S. Chauhan & Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, JJ.
P.G.F. Ltd. & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
Civil Appeal No(s). 6572 of 2004, C.W.P. No. 188 of 2003
Decided On : 12 March, 2013

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. A.K. Ganguli, Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Senior Advocates, Mr. Debesh Panda, Mr. Barnali Basak, Mr. Chhitanya Safaya, Mr. Rohit Tandon, Mr. Subramonium Prasad, Mr. P.N. Puri, Ms. Suruchii Aggarwal, Mr. Manish Kumar, Mr. Siddharth Jaiprakash, Ms. Monisha Handa, Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Ms. Sushma Suri, Mr. J.K. Mohapatra, Ms. Supriya Juneja, Mr. Shovan Mishra, Mr.Milind Kumar, Advocates with team, for the Appearing Parties.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 248 - SEBI Act - Section 11B - Development of agricultural land - Collective Investment Schemes - Appellant known as Pearls Green Forests Limited and called Limited from is having its registered office Chandigarh and its Head Office at 2nd Floor Building, Community Centre New Delhi - Though Memorandum and Articles of Association of Company provide for carrying on very many activities by way of business operations court are only concerned with three of activities Limited namely sale of agricultural land sale and development of agricultural land and joint venture schemes – Held, Apart from imposing cost for having wasted precious time of High Court as well as of this Court in order to ensure that none of investors customers of Limited who have parted with their valuable savings and earnings by falling prey to promise extended to them are deprived of their investments court feel it just and necessary to direct for proper investigation both by Central Bureau of Investigation as well as Department of Income Tax and in event of any malpractice indulged in by PGF Limited to launch appropriate proceedings both Civil Criminal and other actions against Limited as well as all those who were responsible for having indulged in such malpractice – Court also direct second respondent to proceed with its investigation enquiry and inspection of Limited as well as all its other officers and other premises and after due enquiry to be carried out in accordance with law take necessary steps for ensuring refund of monies collected by Limited in connection with sale and development of land its various customers - In order to enable second respondent to carry out various directions contained in this judgment court direct Limited to appoint nodal officer not below rank Director of its company who shall be responsible for furnishing whatever information, documents, account books or other materials that may be required by second respondent Central Bureau of Investigation as well as Income Tax Authorities - While intimating appointment of such nodal officer Limited shall also furnish contact number landline mobile numbers e mail address and other details of its nodal officer its registered office administrative office and other offices - Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT

Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the Division Bench Judgment of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition (CWP) No.188/2003 dated 26.07.2004. Since the Division Bench has dealt with elaborately the background of the case for filing the writ petition at the instance of the appellant, we do not wish to state the same in detail in our judgment. However, we only wish to refer such of those bare facts required to support our decision and conclusion. At the very outset, we wish to note that though this appeal has been preferred by PGF Limited, its Chairman-cum-Managing Director and two other individuals who are stated to be residents of village Khabra and Samaspur of Punjab but the same has been really contested by the appellant No.1 whom we will hereinafter refer to as 'PGF Limited'.

2. The appellant, known as Pearls Green Forests Limited and called PGF Limited from 1997, is having its registered office at S.C.O. No.1042-43, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh and its Head Office at 2nd Floor, Vaishali Building, Community Centre, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi. Though the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the Company provide for carrying on very many activities by way of business operations, we are only concerned with three of the activities of the PGF Limited, namely, sale of agricultural land, sale and development of agricultural land and joint venture schemes. Of the above three operations, when the writ petition was heard by the Division Bench of the High Court it was reported on 28.05.2004 by the learned counsel for the appellants that the PGF Limited took a decision to disband all its schemes, other than its operations relating to the business connected with sale of agricultural land and/or sale and development of agricultural land. Based on the said representation, an interim order came to be passed by the Division Bench on 28.05.2004 with which we are also not seriously concerned.

3. There was a public notice issued by the second respondent herein on 18.12.1997, apart from specific letter addressed by the second respondent to the PGF Limited dated 20.04.1998, by which the PGF Limited was called upon to furnish various details as regards to the Collective Investment Schemes, within 15 days of the issuance of its letter dated 20.04.1998. The second respondent also stated to have issued further communication based on the order of the Delhi High Court in CWP No.3352/1998 dated 7th and 13th October 1998, wherein all plantation companies, agro companies and companies running collective investment schemes, to get themselves credit rated from credit rating companies approved by the second respondent. The PGF Limited was directed to comply with the said directions also.

4. In the above-stated background, the second respondent passed an order on 20.02.2002 in exercise of its powers under Section 11B of the SEBI Act, by issuing some stringent directions against the PGF Limited. The PGF Limited challenged the said order before the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.4620/2002 wherein the second respondent came forward to keep its order dated 20.02.2002 in abeyance, provided the PGF Limited agreed to furnish the information sought for within two weeks. Based on the said stand of the second respondent by order of the High Court dated 29.04.2002, the PGF Limited was directed to submit its reply to the show cause notice and furnish all requisite information to the second respondent. The second respondent was also directed to provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the PGF Limited. The order dated 20.02.2002 was also directed to be kept in abeyance, till the final order was passed. Subsequent to the said order of the High Court dated 29.04.2002, after following the directions contained in the said order, the second respondent passed its order on 06.12.2002, by which it was held that the business activity of the PGF Limited, namely, the sale and development of agricult












































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top