M. Jagannadha Rao, J. — The 1st petitioner is Mr. Ravi Kant and his wife is the 2nd petitioner. They seek issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the orders of the National Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (herein called the National Commission") dated 8.12.95 in First Appeal No. 666 of 1993 and the orders of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi hereinafter, called the "State Commission" dated 15.10.93 in 4 cases viz. Case Nos. C-242, C-243, C-255 of 1992 and C- 82 of 1993.

2. By orders dated 15.10.93 passed under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called "the Act"), the State Commission imposed a sentence of 1 year simple imprisonment on the 1st petitioner and a fine of Rs. 5000/- in each of the 4 cases (or in default, simple imprisonment of 3 months). The 2nd petitioner being a lady was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- in the Case No. C-243 of 1992. The above said order was confirmed by the National Commission on 8.12.95.

3. The petitioners floated two companies, one in 1987 called the Instant Growth Funds (Pvt.) Ltd. and the other in 1989 called in the I.G.F. Leasing (Pvt.) Ltd. They were the two Directors in each of these companies. Members of the public invested huge sums in these companies. It is revealed from the Bankers that Instant Growth Funds (P) Ltd. received an amount of Rs. 50.18 lakhs, while I.G.P. Leasing (P) Ltd received Rs. 45.57 lakhs. The 1st petitioner issued postdated cheques for principal and interest. Clause 2 of the agreement required that the loan — trust money be invested in hire purchase business in 30 days. Clause 3 stated that hire purchase agreement should be entered between the investor/ (shareholder), hirers and Company, and the original hire purchase agreement will be supplied to the investor/shareholder. These two clauses were not implemented. The claimant in Case No. 242, who is a house-wife obtained decrees from the State Commission for Rs. 1 lakh in Case No. 242, Rs. 1,94,000/- in Case No. 82/93. One Amritlal, a retired official, obtained decree in Case No. 243 for Rs. 1,70,000/- and one Deepak Chopra obtained decree in Case No. 335/92 for Rs.1 lakh.

4. The above claimants, who obtained decrees from the State Commission, could not realise their monies under Section 25 of the Act. Therefore, they moved the State Commission under Section 27 of the Act. The State Commission — after applying the principle of "lifting the veil", held the two petitioners personally liable as they were the persons actually controlling and running the companies and passed the impugned order of imprisonment for one year and fine on the 1st petitioner and fine on the 2nd petitioner, which order was confirmed by the National Commission.

5. The petitioners 1 & 2, after the State Commission had passed decrees on 10.2.92,4.2.92 and 29.5.92 as aforesaid, moved the Company Court on 2.6.92 for winding up of M/s. I.G.F. Leasing (P) Ltd. The Court appointed a Provisional Liquidator. The investors anticipated a similar winding up petition for M/s. Instant Growth Funds (P) Ltd. and filed a caveat averting appointment of a Provisional Liquidator. The Official Liquidator filed 2 reports in C.P. 122/92. In para 4 of the 1st report dated 8.11.93, he stated that vital books of account and other records, such as minutes book, shareholders' register. Board's minutes book, title deed etc. were not available.

6. Initially the 1st petitioner, Mr. Ravi Kant filed C.W.P. No. 3858/94 and a Division Bench of this Court passed orders on 1.5.95 directing the petitioners to appear before the National Commission and by that order the writ petition was disposed of.

7. Meanwhile, in the Company Court, the petitioners filed C.A. 572/95 for disposal of assets of the Company. After some hearings, the Company Court ordered, on 30.11.95 a CBI inquiry. The CBI has submitted a report and it is before the Company Court. A charge sheet has been filed. It appears that the Company Jud