1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION jmi COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 244 OF 2010 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 123 OF 2010 Mr. Kishor Shankar Patil. ..Applicant/ Org. Petitioner. vs. M/s. Yescube Infrastructure Ltd. ..Respondent. .... Mr. R.S. Shekhawat, for Applicant. Mr. S.K. Chaurasia, for Company. Official Liquidator, present. .... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 7TH MAY 2010. P. C. By this company application, the petitioner has prayed for appointment of the Official Liquidator in respect of the Company M/s. Yescube Infrastructure Limited, with a direction to take charge of all the properties, bank accounts, etc. in respect of the Company wherever the same are found. 2. According to the petitioner, the Company had issued several advertisements representing that if an individual invests a sum of Rs.2,51,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs Fifty One Thousand Only), he would be entitled to get monthly interest of Rs. 35,926/-. The petitioner contacted the Company and upon 2 inquiries, was informed that the Company owned various properties situated at Kalyan. A copy of the scheme of the Company is annexure- ‘B’ to the petition. 3. According to the petitioner, on behalf of the Company it was further represented to him that all the properties owned by the Company are agricultural properties and that the Company had purchased the same at a throw away price. The Company is in the process of development of the said properties. Once the properties are developed, the market value of the same will be 100 times the amount for which the Company had purchased the said property. The Company further represented that out of the larger plot of land, it shall dispose of a part of the land and a part would be given by them to different persons on licence/lease basis and accordingly, the Company shall generate necessary income out of the same. According to the petitioner, on the basis of the said representations be invested Rs.2,51,000/- with the Company for which the Company has issued a receipt dated 5th December 2009. 4. According to the petitioner, after the petitioner made the said payment to the Company, the petitioner learnt that no land was available with the Company which could be developed immediately. No interest was paid by the Company as promised. The petitioner, therefore, through his Advocate issued a statutory 3 notice to the Company dated 20th January 2010 recording the aforestated facts and called upon the Company to refund the entire sum of Rs.2,51,000/- to the petitioner. The Company by its letter dated 25th January 2010 replied to the statutory notice wherein the Company denied the allegations made in the statutory notice and inter alia recorded that “neither we are liable to refund nor we are in a position to refund the money, which please note.” 5. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the Company has been incorporated only with a view to defraud the innocent members of the public by offering them a high rate of interest on their investments and thereafter not only deprive them of the interest as promised but also the principal amount invested by them. It is submitted that if the provisional liquidator as sought by the petitioner is not appointed, grave and irreparable harm, loss, damage, injury and prejudice will be caused to the petitioner as well as to the innocent members of the public who have invested in the said Company. 6. On 6th May 2010 i.e. yesterday, the learned Advocate appearing for the Company on instructions from Sabistin Pereira, Director of the Company has submitted that the criminal proceedings have been filed by several investors against the Company for allegedly defrauding them. However, the learned 4 Advocate was unable to give particulars of the said proceedings. In view thereof, the learned Advocate for the Company was directed to keep the Director of the Company present before this court on 7th May 2010 i.e. today with all the relevant papers including the papers pertaining to the criminal proceedings filed by the investors and the orders passed therein. Today, the learned Advocate appearing for the Company has informed the Court that in view of the criminal proceedings/investigations pending against the Company and its Directors, the Directors of the Company are absconding. 7. Under the circumstances, I am convinced that the Company has been incorporated only with a view to defraud the innocent members of the public by offering them a higher rate of interest on their investments and thereafter, not only deprive them of the interest as promised but also the principal amount invested by them. In view thereof, the Company application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). The Company petition be placed for admission on 16th June 2010. [ S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. ]