Appellant asked about non refund of money by Kuber Mutual Benefits Ltd - PIO: Kuber was registered under the Companies Act & not by RBI; It was appellant’s duty to check their activities - CIC: Appellant may approach the official liquidator
1. The appellant, Shri S K Sharma, submitted RTI application dated August 20, 2013 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Reserve Bank of India, Patna; seeking action taken on his letter dated 29.5.2013 pertaining to non refund of money by Kuber Mutual Benefits Limited Bank.
2. The CPIO, vide letter dated September 30, 2013; informed the appellant that the above mentioned Bank was not registered with the RBI u/s 45 IA and liquidation proceedings were going on of the bank. Not satisfied with the CPIO’s reply, the appellant preferred an appeal dated October 21, 2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA) stating that he wanted to know as to how this bank was being run without registration with the RBI and who forfeited the properties of the Bank etc. Vide order dated November 27, 2013; the FAA observed that the appellant had raised new queries in his appeal which was not permissible and upheld the CPIO’s decision.
3. Dissatisfied with the response of the public authority, the appellant preferred second appeal before the Commission.
4. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant was not present during the hearing in spite of a written notice having been sent to him. The respondents submitted that the appellant had sought information regarding the nonrefund of his money by the Kuber Mutual Benefits Limited Bank. They had already informed the appellant that this company was not registered by the RBI and was registered as Company under the Companies Act, 1956; but since the company was doing financial business it was their duty to check their activities. In this regard the RBI had filed the winding up petition and Hon’ble Allahabad High Court on 23.4.2002 had ordered the company to be wound up. An official liquidator was appointed in this case. The court had also appointed the claim committee to refund the money to the investors. No further action was to be taken by the RBI, therefore, in this present case, they had forwarded the complaint dated 29.5.2013 of the appellant to the Registrar of Companies (ROC), Kanpur which in turn forwarded it to the official liquidator vide their letter dt.22.7.2013. The matter was with the official liquidator who was authorised to settle the dues of the investors; therefore the appellant should directly approach the official liquidator.
5. In view of the above submissions made by the respondents, the Commission observes that the information available with the respondents had been provided to the appellant. The appellant has a grievance/ complaint for which he may like to approach the official liquidator. The appeal is disposed of.
Citation: Shri S K Sharma v. Reserve Bank of India in Appeal No. CIC/MP/A/2014/000865