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

FIROZA BANO, N.C.SHARMA
HEADWAY FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
CHANDRA MOHAN AGARWAL – Respondent


ORDER

Mr. Justice Navin Chandra Sharma, President — The three revisions mentioned above will be decided by this common order as they involve identical questions of law and fact.

2. The petitioner in the revision petitions namely. The Headway Finance & Investment Co. Ltd., regd. office Agra had floated a guarantee money back investment scheme. Under this scheme any person could make a monthly payment of Rs. 100/- for 100 months and upon maturity, an amount of Rs. 10,000/- plus 4,500 was payable. Chandra Mohan Agarwal, Pramod Kumar Agarwal and Dinesh Chand Bansal had agreed to invest in the above saving scheme floated by the petitioner Company. Chandra Mohan Agarwal deposited 86 monthly instalments of Rs. 100/-, Pramod Kumar Agarwal deposited Rs. 4,000/- in quarterly instalments because the scheme to which he had contributed was quarterly. Dinesh Chand Bansal deposited a total amount of Rs. 4,000/- by quarterly instalments under quarterly deposit scheme. The Reserve Bank of India issued a prohibitory order restraining the petitioner-company from accepting the deposits. All the three complainants then filed complaint cases before the District Forum, Dholpur. Complaint Case No. 84/92 out





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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top