Shree
Om Sainath Car on Rent Pvt Ltd (SOSN)
COMPANY HAS BEEN ORDERED BY HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY FOR WINDING UP IN C.P.NO.343 OF 2011
CLAIMS WERE ASKED BY OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AND LAST DATE FOR SUBMITTING CLAIMS WAS 10/06/2013.
This company was registered with ROC Mumbai,
CIN No. U63040MH2006PLC162892 and registration number .- 162892, with
registered office: Shop No.14, Avan Apartment, Chhatrapati Shivaji Road,
Dahanukar wadi, Kandivalli (West), Mumbai- 400 067
There
are three Four cases, whom I knows filed against this Company. If there are
other cases also, With regard to Others cases, I do not have any knowledge.
1. Case filed
before IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI, Numbered CS(OS) 1649/2012, filed R.K. CHOPRA
..... Plaintiff, CIVIL SUITS-For RECOVERY of money and still it is
pending 24.10.2013, Counsel
for the plaintiff submits that he has received the letter dated 16.04.2013
from the official liquidator stating therein that the defendant company has
gone under liquidation. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that
since the defendant company has gone under liquidation, the suit is liable
to be adjourned sine die. He has also filed the copy of letter dated 16.04.2013
received by him from official liquidator and same is pending for further
adjudication.
2.
Another
Case filed before High Court of Bombay Numbered as S/2839/2010 filed on 08-07-2010 under civil procedure
code, Monetary suit. By Usha Baban Karande
3.
And
another case by same person Usha Baban Karande before High Court of Bombay on
29-09-2010 and numbered
LPETN/771/2010 before High Court of Bombay and pending as Company has been ordered for liquidation process.
LPETN/771/2010 before High Court of Bombay and pending as Company has been ordered for liquidation process.
4.
Third and
Important case is filed before High Court of Bombay for Liquidation U/s
433,434,439 COMPANIES ACT, by Tauheed Ahmad A Khan and numbered as C.P
no 343 of 2011 on 09-06-2011 and ordered for liquidation. orders are put up
herewith in last.
BRIEF HISTORY AS YOU ALREADY KNOW
Car rental company downs shutters
Bangalore, Feb 2, DHNS:
Assets
worth Rs 60 lakh recovered A car rental company that offered
high returns on investment has closed doors. Shree Om Sainath Car on Rent
Pvt Ltd (SOSN) that promised a Return on Investment of nearly Rs 6,800 every
month on an investment of Rs 2.1 lakh for booking a Honda City car and leasing
it for a period of 60 months, has now closed office across the country,
following alleged fraud and cheating. On Tuesday, the City police arrested Lata Murali (45), branch manager, authorised by the company to receive and make payments in the City and seized assets worth Rs 60 lakh, belonging to SOSN, including seven Mahindra Logan cars under the company banner.
Police said investors in the City were being assured by the branch manager of receiving their monthly payments soon. “However, there was no returns for the last two months, leading to a complaint filed in Ashoknagar police station on 18 Jan, 2010,” informed a police officer. As many as 900 people had invested an estimated Rs 20 crore in SOSN in Bangalore alone, leading to a huge scam running across the country.
The SOSN has been accused of fraud and
cheating its customers since Nov 2009 and the Managing Director, Rupesh Verma
was arrested in Delhi in December last year. Surprisingly, the Bangalore branch
of the company was running even after that.
According to the police, Lata Murali had been
assuring the customers that the entire trouble had brewed due to issual of
duplicate cheque numbers and account numbers by the bank which was servicing
the company. Almost 70 per cent of the cheques issued by the company in a
post-dated format had bounced across the country.
Anxious SOSN investors have logged on to forums
and have formed support groups. Details
with regard to lawyers representing the company MD on how to go about
reclaiming their lost money, were also being discussed by investors.
Some members rued over the fact that cars that
were transferred to their names by the company after their initial investment,
were also being seized by the police pending further investigation.
HT
Correspondent , Hindustan Times New Delhi, December 31,
2009
First Published: 00:00 IST(31/12/2009) | Last
Updated: 00:01 IST(31/12/2009)
Rupesh Verma is no ordinary cheat. Out on a con
job for the past three years, Verma purchased 166 luxury cars, acquired ten
hotels and resorts in various cities and stacked more than Rs. 20
crore in bank accounts.
“Investors were asked to invest Rs.1.25 lakh to 3
lakh depending upon the make or model of the vehicle, as an initial deposit for
availing loans from the bank,” said Vivek Gogia, additional commissioner of
police (EOW). “Verma would enter into a 60 months agreement with his
victims and promise a return of Rs.3,000-Rs 10,500 per month on the usage of
car, besides paying the installments and other expenses. He would also give 12
post-dated cheques to gain their confidence."
“The entire fraud was dependent on roping in new
victims for which he took out advertisements in leading English and Hindi
newspapers and got catchy brochures printed. He paid over Rs.2 crore to
the advertisement agency alone,” said the officer.
During investigations, 24 bank accounts of Verma
were detected and money to the tune of Rs.11.54 crore frozen in these
accounts. The accused also owns properties in Gurgaon, Mumbai, Indore,
Jaipur, Nagpur and Raipur among others. Police have recovered 100 cars.
“We have identified two Hotels and resorts in
Gurgaon, two flats and one office in Mumbai, one resorts at Indore and four
office premises at Jaipur, Nagpur, Indore and Raipur All these properties have
been sealed,” said the officer.
Accounts of his three other sister concerns —
Shree Sai Cine Vision, Shree Om Sai Nath Construction Private Limited and Swiss
Cabs — are being analysed to examine the fraud.
He allegedly cheated more than 500 people to the
tune of Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 3 lakh each. He is learnt to have
duped several policemen also.
In the other scheme, investors were induced to
deposit Rs.50,000- Rs. 3 lakh and were promised monthly return of
Rs.2,000- Rs. 20,000, police said.
Verma had launched two con schemes. The first was
the “car on rent” scheme.
Verma was arrested on December 16 while he was
addressing the media at the Press Club of India when investors came to know
that he was there.
When the police raided Verma's office on
Barakhamba Road last week, they were shocked to find cash and gold coins
worth Rs. 2.4 crore piled in cupboards and drawers.
ORDERS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMPANY PETITION NO.343 OF 2011
Tauheed Ahmad A. Khan.
] ... Petitioner
Vs.
M/s. Om Sai Nath Car On Rent Ltd.
] ... Respondent
Mr. K. T. Thomas for Petitioner.
None for Respondent.
CORAM : S. J. KATHAWALLA, J.
DATE : JUNE 14, 2012
P.C. :
By this Company Petition, the Petitioner seeks winding up of M/s.Om Sai Nath Car On Rent Ltd. (‘the Company’) which was incorporated
on 28th June 2006 under the provisions of The Companies Act, 1956 (‘the
Act’). The Company Petition is at the stage of admission.
2. According to the Petitioner, the Company, through its Directors, had approached the Petitioner in July 2009 to offer “the resort scheme” for an amount of Rs.1,25,000/ in consideration of which the Company offered to
pay Rs.8,040/ per month for a
continuous period of 60
months payable on or before the 10th day of each calender month.
3.
On 1st August 2009, the Petitioner purchased two of the said resort schemes
by executing an Agreement with the
Company for a
total consideration of Rs.2,50,000/.The Petitioner was given a discount of Rs.10,000/ by the Company. Therefore the Petitioner paid a total amount of Rs.2,40,000/ to the Company. Under the said scheme, the Company wasrequiredto
pay to the Petitioner an amount
of Rs.1,0808/ for two schemes
purchased by the Petitioner. According
to the Petitioner, the Company paid three
installments aggregating to Rs.48,240/ to
the Petitioner for the said two schemes and thereafter failed and neglected to make any payment. The Petitioner therefore, through his Advocate, sent a statutory
notice dated 11/04/2011 to the
Company calling upon
the Company to pay an amount of Rs.2,57,280/ to the Petitioner along with interest thereon @ 18% within 21 days from the receipt of the said notice. The packet containing
the statutory notice is returned to
the Company with the postal remark “Not Known”.
The Petitioner therefore filed the present
Company Petition and attempted to
serve the same on
the Company. The packet containing the Company Petition is also returned back
with the remark that the Company
is closed since the last few months.
The Petitioner as therefore
submitted that the
Company deserves to be wound up on the ground that it is unable to pay its debt. The Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner has also submitted that the
Company has played a fraud on
the Petitionerand many
more innocent investors like the Petitioner
and has now also
abandoned its registered office. The Petitioner has also produced before this Court the registered address of the Company shown in the records of the ROC till date and has correctly submitted that since the Petitioner has sought to serve the statutory notice as well as a copy of the Petition at the very same address, the statutory notice as well as the Petition are deemed to have been served at the registered address of the Company.
3. From the aforesaid facts,
I am satisfied that an amount
of 2,57,280/ along with interest thereon as claimed is due and payable by the
Company to the Petitioner. It
appears that the Company has perpetratedfraud
on the Petitioner and has also
abandoned
its registered office. The Company has also failed to respond to the statutory notice and/or to make any payment after receipt of the said notice. The submissions/contentions made/advanced in
the Company Petition have therefore remained uncontroverted. Hence the following Order :
i) The Company Petition is
admitted and made returnable on
18th July 2012.
ii) The Petition shall be
advertised by the Petitioner in two
local newspapers namely ‘Free Press
Journal’ (in English), ‘NavShakti’ (in Marathi) and in Maharashtra Government Gazette.
iii) The Petitioner shall, on
or before 25th June 2012, deposit
an amount of Rs.10,000/ with the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this
Court towards publication charges with
intimation to the Company Registrar, failing which the Company Petition shall stand dismissed for nonprosecution.
iv)
A copy of this Order shall forthwith be served on the Company at its registered office, by the Advocate for the Petitioner.
(S. J. KATHAWALLA, J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMPANY PETITION NO.343 OF 2011
Tauheed Ahmad A. Khan. ]
... Petitioner
Vs.
M/s. Om Sai Nath Car On Rent Ltd.
] ... Respondent
None for Petitioner.
None for Respondent.
CORAM : S. J. KATHAWALLA, J.
DATE : JULY 19, 2012
P.C. :
1. By this Company Petition, the Petitioner seeks winding up of M/s. Om Sai Nath Car On Rent Ltd. (‘the Company’) which was incorporated on 28th June 2006 under the provisions of The Companies Act, 1956 (‘the Act’). The Company Petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.
2. According
to the Petitioner, the Company,
through its Directors, had approached the
Petitioner in July 2009 to offer “the
resort scheme” for
an amount of Rs.1,25,000/ in consideration of which
the Company offered to pay Rs.8,040/ per month for a continuous period of 60 months payable on or before the 10th day of each calender month.
3. On 1st
August 2009, the Petitioner purchased two
of the said resort schemes by executing
an Agreement with the Company for
a total consideration of Rs.2,50,000/.
The Petitioner was given a discount of Rs.10,000/ by the Company. Therefore the Petitioner paid a total amount of Rs.2,40,000/
to the Company. Under the said
scheme, the Company
was required to pay to the Petitioner an amount of Rs.16,080/ for two schemes purchased by the Petitioner.
According to the Petitioner, the Company paid three installments aggregating to Rs.48,240/ to the Petitioner for the said two schemes
and thereafter failed and neglected
to make any payment. The Petitioner
therefore, through his Advocate, sent a
statutory notice
dated 11/04/2011 to the Company calling upon the Company to pay an amount of Rs.2,57,280/ to the Petitioner along with interest thereon @ 18% within 21 days from the receipt of the said notice. The packet containing the statutory notice was returned to the Company with the postal remark “Not Known”.
4. The
Petitioner therefore filed the present
Company Petition and attempted to serve
the same on the Company.
The packet containing
the Company Petition was also returned back with the remark that the Company is closed since the last few months. The Company Petition was admitted by an Order of this Court dated 14th June 2012 and directed to be advertised. The Affidavit proving publication dated 13th July 2012 is on record. Notice under Rule 28 of The Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 sought
to be served at the registered address
of the Company is returned with the
remark ‘Left’.
An Affidavit to this effect dated 17th July 2012 is filed in Court.
5.
The Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner has submitted that the Company is unable to pay its debt and deserves to be wound up.
The Learned Advocate appearing for
the Petitioner has also submitted that
the Company has played a fraud on
the Petitioner and many more
innocent investors like the Petitioner and has now also abandoned its registered office.
The Petitioner has also produced before this Court the registered address of the Company
shown in the records of the ROC
till date and has correctly submitted that since the Petitioner has sought to serve the statutory notice as well as a copy of the Petition and the notice under Rule 28 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 at the very same address, the statutory notice as well as the Petition and
the notice under Rule 28 of
the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 are deemed
to have been served at the
registered address of the Company.
6.
From the aforesaid facts, it is established that the Company is required to pay an amount of Rs.2,57,280/ along with interest thereon as claimed, to the Petitioner.
After admission of the Company Petition was advertised, 21 claims have been received from the creditors of the Company who were made similar
promises by the Company and later
breached. It is clear that
the Company has perpetrated a fraud on
the Petitioner as well as many other investors/parties by alluring them to invest monies in “the resort scheme” and thereafter depriving them of their principal as well as interest. The Company has also abandoned its registered office. The statutory notice, the copy of the Company
Petition as well as the notice under
Rule 28 of the
Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 are deemed
to have been served on the Company
as correctly submitted by the Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner. The Company has not filed any reply to the Petition. The submissions/contentions made/advanced
in the Company Petition have
therefore remained uncontroverted. The Company Petition is therefore allowed in terms of Prayer Clauses (a) and (b). The Official Liquidator shall act on an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate of this Court.
(S. J. KATHAWALLA, J.)
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY
ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
OFFICIAL
LIQUIDATOR'S REPORT NO.158 of 2013/LIQN-IX
(DT.12/03/2013)
IN
COMPANY
PETITION NO. 343 OF 2011
In
the matter of Companies Act, (I) of 1956;
and
In
the matter of M/s. Om Sai Nath Car on Rent Ltd. (In Liqn.)
Mr.
K. T. Thomas, advocate for the petitioner.
Ms.
Racheet Dhuru, advocate for Ex-Directors.
Ms.
Rupa Sutar & Ms.Yogini Chauhan, Assistant Official Liquidators
present.
CORAM
: RANJIT MORE, J.
DATED
: 25th April, 2013.
P.C.:
Heard learned counsel
for the petitioner. None appears on behalf of the Commissioner of Police,
Economic Offences Wing, CID, Mumbai.
2. Learned counsel
for the company, however, seeks some time to take instructions and file reply
so far as relief concerned in prayer clause (a) is concerned. Time is granted.
Stand over to 4th July, 2013.
3. So far as prayer
clause (b) is concerned, by this prayer, permission is asked to invite claims
from workers/creditors by issuing claim notice. Since it is mandatory under
Rule 148 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, to invite claims from
workers/creditors, prayer clause (b) is granted.
(RANJIT MORE, J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
OFFICIAL
LIQUIDATOR’S REPORT NO.158/2013/LIQN.IX
(Dt.12/3/2013)
IN
COMPANY PETITION NO.343 OF 2011
In the matter of the Companies Act, I of 1956.
AND
In the matter of M/s. Om Sai Nath
Car On Rent Ltd. (in Liqn.)
---
Mr. Mahesh Athavale, API, Economic Offence Wing.
Ms. Rucheeta Dhuru for Ex-Directors.
Mr. K.T. Thomas for the petitioner.
Ms. Rupa Sutar & Ms. Yogini Chauhan, Assistant
Official Liquidator
present.
----
CORAM : N.M. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 1
AUGUST 2013
P. C. :
. Mr. Athavale, API
appears for Economic Offence Wing, CID, Mumbai and states that some time may be
granted for filing a reply. Even on earlier occasion none appeared on behalf of
the Commissioner of Police.
2. Stand over to 22
August 2013.
N.M.JAMDAR, J.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR'S REPORT NO. 158 OF 2013
IN
COMPANY PETITION NO. 343 OF 2011
In the matter of the Companies Act, I of 1956
AND
In the matter of M/s. Om Sai Nath Car On Rent Ltd.,
( in Liquidation)
---
Mr. K. T. Thomas for the Petitioner.
Mr. Raju Mane, APP for the Economic Offences Wing.
Mr. Pravin Bhagat, API, Economic Offences Wing
Unit No. 9,
Mumbai.
Mrs. Rupa Sutar, AOL is present.
Mrs. Yogini Chauhan, AOL is present.
---
CORAM : N. M. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 10
OCTOBER, 2013
P.C. :
The learned APP on instructions states that
the investigation is complete and the chargesheet will be filed within a period
of two weeks from today. Learned APP seeks time to file affidavit, placing on
record as regards position of the vehicles in the custody of the Police
authorities, as it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner
that these vehicles are not in use and are diminishing in value.
Stand over to 24
October 2013.
(N.M.JAMDAR,J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR’S REPORT NO.158/2013/Liqn.IX
in
COMPANY PETITION NO.343 OF 2011
In the matter of Companies Act, I of
1956 ;
And
In the matter of M/s. Om Sai Nath Car
On Rent Ltd. (In liqn.)
---
Vanshikha Dawani i/by Rox Mandal Partners for
ex-directors.
K.T. Thomas for the petitioner.
Mr. Raju J. Mane, APP for Economic Offences Wing.
Ms. Rupa Sutar, Assistant Official Liquidator
present.
---
CORAM : N.M. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 19
December 2013
P.C. :
. The learned APP has
tendered on record an affidavit filed by the Inspector of Police attached to
Economic Offences Wing. It is stated in the affidavit that certain vehicles
were seized under panchnama. Out of 163 vehicles seized 142 vehicles have been
returned after investigation to the owners of the vehicles. It is not
discernible from this affidavit as to whether the vehicles are in the name of
the company. If that be so, they would be assets of the company and available
with the Official Liquidator to take liquidation process forward. The Inspector
of Police attached to EOW will place on record details of the vehicles and
which of the vehicles were registered in the name of the company. The Inspector
of Police attached to EOW will also explain on affidavit as to whether the
vehicles belonging to the company have been returned back. The Inspector of
Police, EOW will also explain as to how the assets of the company have been
unilaterally returned back to the investors without reference to the Official
Liquidator.
The Inspector of
Police, EOW will also give all the particulars including papers and documents
pertaining to other assets of the company which have been seized by the
Inspector of Police, EOW. Affidavit to be filed before the next date i.e. 30
January 2014.
N.M. JAMDAR, J.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR’S REPORT NO.158/2013/Liqn.IX
in
COMPANY PETITION NO.343 OF 2011
In the matter of Companies Act, I of
1956 ;
And
In the matter of M/s. Om Sai Nath Car On Rent Ltd.
(In liqn.)
---
Vanshikha Dawani i/by Rox Mandal Partners for
ex-directors.
K.T. Thomas for the petitioner.
Mr. Raju J. Mane, APP for Economic Offences Wing.
Ms. Rupa Sutar, Assistant Official Liquidator
present.
---
CORAM : N.M. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 19
December 2013
P.C. : . The learned
APP has tendered on record an affidavit filed by the Inspector of Police attached
to Economic Offences Wing. It is stated in the affidavit that certain vehicles
were seized under panchnama. Out of 163 vehicles seized 142 vehicles have been
returned after investigation to the owners of the vehicles. It is not
discernible from this affidavit as to whether the vehicles are in the name of
the company. If that be so, they would be assets of the company and available
with the Official Liquidator to take liquidation process forward. The Inspector
of Police attached to EOW will place on record details of the vehicles and
which of the vehicles were registered in the name of the company. The Inspector
of Police attached to EOW will also explain on affidavit as to whether the
vehicles belonging to the company have been returned back. The Inspector of
Police, EOW will also explain as to how the assets of the company have been
unilaterally returned back to the investors without reference to the Official
Liquidator.
The Inspector of
Police, EOW will also give all the particulars including papers and documents
pertaining to other assets of the company which have been seized by the
Inspector of Police, EOW. Affidavit to be filed before the next date i.e. 30
January 2014.
N.M. JAMDAR, J.
Thanks
Dr.
Zulfiqar Ali Khan,M.A.,M.L.,M.Phil,Ph.D
Advocate
& Commissioner of Oaths
High
Court of Madras
Chennai-
600 104
MB:
9884102961 / 9444412961
what is the latest update of this case
ReplyDeleteSir I have not filed any complain against sos . So may I got my money after liquidation or court only refund who files for
ReplyDeleterajhitechagro@yahoo.com
It is very nice posting good to see.
ReplyDeleterent car and driver jakarta | car rental in jakarta
Nice post with great information, i like it. There are many car rental services in India for easy travel.
ReplyDeleteThank you so much for posting these for global use!
ReplyDeleteYou are making the world a better place!
Sewa Mobil Dan Supir Jakarta | Rental Car Package Jakarta
I was paid Rs.115,000,00 to shree om sainath car on rent limited by chaque No. 000572 on 30-11-2009 please give me maximum amount for heart operation of my wife on 20-3-2015 -vinod khimji prajapati fatania
ReplyDeletemobile 9820373837
E-Mail : agni_chakra@yahoo.com
Dear zulfiqar, thanx for your co operation.You are doing funtastic noble work for us.God bless you.God gives you more straingh & health for doing this kind of work for the lakhs of people who suffering from this kind of fraud.
ReplyDeleteJagdish pawar-9920111505
My self deepak pawar I have also not filed any case against verma will I get my money any update or if any one can give me the update or send a email will be very thankful to u . deepak.pawar9559@gmail.com
ReplyDeleteplease intimate latest update on the subject as I have invested Rs 5 lacs in same company at lucknow branch (UP)
ReplyDeleteNice blog...Very useful information is providing by ur blog..here is a way to find.
ReplyDeleteOneplus One Covers
HI,
ReplyDeleteVery nice share . I am susanta kumar satapathy from mumbai. This case seems like collapsed no any progress from last 5 years . people who invested money may or may not get their return. is There any requirement to lodge a complain against sosns or not ? if yes what is the benifit ? if no then can we get our money back? so many questions are there. if any body there who is directly connected to this case and attended the court hearing , he can only share the fact.
thank you all
Is there any new update on this?
ReplyDeleteAny contact person, who can provide more information about this case?
what is the latest update on sosn legal case. When will we get our money back. what shall be the procedure for the same.
ReplyDeleteI am inveted this company money please any new please
ReplyDeleteis anybody aware of present where the case stand whether money is being distributed by the official liquidator of high court of mumbai
ReplyDeleteSuch a very useful article. Very interesting to read this article.I would like to thank you for the efforts you had made for writing this awesome article. Sakarya araç kiralama
ReplyDeleteEasily, the article is actually the best topic on this registry related issue. I fit in with your conclusions and will eagerly look forward to your next updates. car tow dublin
ReplyDelete