Investments deal between x and y
Siddique
(Querist) 20 March 2015
This query is : Resolved
Dear Respected Sirs,
Would like to know your expert legal opinion on the below matter of finances/investments between 2 parties viz. X and Y as outlined below :
X has been running a small-scale shop dealing in boutique & tailoring niche since the past few years. Y invests in X's business a certain amount for monthly returns. During the period when Y invested with X, the business was booming. Getting carried-away by this, X inadvertently & under ignorance committed to pay Y, an exorbitantly high, very unrealistic monthly returns to Y without enlightening Y (unintentionally) about the inherent underlying risks of the business (downfall). This deal was based on 100% verbal communications only & no writing work/legal agreement of any sort was executed between X & Y.
The exorbitantly high payments by X to Y over the months hardened the perception & mindset of Y that regardless of the recession in X's business, Y should always continue to receive the so-called "Profits" from X regularly every month. Y was always under the false impression that she would endlessly continue & entitled to receive the so-called "Profits" from X.
So far, the total installments of money returned by X to Y over the months, far exceeds the capital invested by more than 200%.
X was so over-optimistic & blind with her booming business that she could not realise that she would most certainly face an inevitable downfall period in her business at some stage which would play havoc with her finances. She failed to anticipate that how she would pay Y under these circumstances. And the inevitable happened; the business went into recession. X started defaulting on payments to Y & no longer in a position to further pay Y any more money.
Just to reiterate, X has already returned to Y more than 200% of money invested by Y (which X has regularly maintained a record of; no such record maintained by Y)
X is taking the stand & stressing on the fact that since she has already paid Y more than 200%, X is no longer obliged to pay any more. Also since the X's business has crashed & near shut-down, she (X) is not in any position whatsoever to pay Y any further. Despite recovering 200% more than her actual capital, Y still continues to pressurise X to keep on paying her (Y) knowing well that X has incurred big losses in the business.
Now relations has gone sour between the two & Y threatens to file a civil suit against X for recovery of Y's capital.
Kindly advise how much weightage is there in this threat by Y & how would the law view this deal ? Is this case admissible in the court-of-law as there are no written / legal agreements of this deal between the two ?
Between X & Y, who has the right stand ?
Siddique
(Querist) 21 March 2015
So does it not warrant any valuable inputs from the panel ?
OR
since it is so-called long and/or commercial and/or professional query, does it mean that it is just academic & posted for time pass OR it does not merit any discussion ?
You would better stay-off the thread rather than add negativity !
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 21 March 2015
The author is abusive and I leave it to the discretion of other experts to reply query of such abusive author.
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 22 March 2015
Mr.Siddique,
Time and again the experts have been advising the querists, to restrain themselves from being abusive towards the experts.U have posted a query, if it warrants a suitable reply the experts will answer. The experts are a group of legal professionals and they are not servants of the querists. U cannot demand anything.Many querists are posting vague and acadamic queries wasting the valuable time of the experts.If UR query attracts good advice it will be given.hence use proper language when posting.Answer these and expect reply from the experts.
Siddique
(Querist) 22 March 2015
@Expert : Hon'ble Devajyoti Barman :
Sorry but I disagree; there are simply no abuses, may be at worst, my reply was sarcastic & blunt but definitely not abusive. Nowhere I have used abusive words. I believe in polite, humble & soft-spoken interaction.
My 2nd comment was blunt because I got provoked by your needless comment but it was not abusive in any case.
@Expert : Hon'ble SAINATH DEVALLA :
Sir, I had to reply in that manner as the "Expert" had unnecessarily instigated me by her comment which was not adding any value. He/she could have simply chose to ignore my query & that was absolutely fine with me. There was simply no reason for her to post that comment if he/she could not or did not want to give specific reply to my query for whatever reasons.
What is the point of his/her comment "commercial/professional query" ? I simply fail to understand what does this comment imply ? I was simply seeking / requesting expert legal opinions on an investment deal gone wrong !
"The experts are a group of legal professionals and they are not servants of the querists. U cannot demand anything." ==> Sorry Sir, but I can't find any text in my query which is or sounds like "demanding" ! I would be greatful if you could help me locate that please.
"Many querists are posting vague and acadamic queries wasting the valuable time of the experts" ==> you are absolutely right hence I posted the detailed query without skipping any vital details, which was tagged as the "long......query". I had to give all the relevant details which I thought were vital for a proper advice; had I omitted some points, there could have been follow-up questions from the "Experts".
"If UR query attracts good advice it will be given.hence use proper language when posting" ==> Sorry again I didn't find any improper words in my original post, can you please help me find one ?
PERIOD.
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 22 March 2015
Ur reply sends a message that U want to prove the experts wrong in their expression, which is not acceptable by this forum. I am not finding fault with UR query,the way U have addressed Mr.Barman as Hon'ble Devajyoti Barman,shows UR attitude towards the experts. That word is used only to a few select people. U have just defended UR self in UR reply to my answer.My answer was in a general view of 70% of the querists.Hence U have to restrain UR self from questioning the experts on their authority,only then U can expect a suitable solution to UR query.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 24 March 2015
It is hoped the author and expert should honor mutual respect of each.
The comments of author are unwarranted and hence condemned.
Siddique
(Querist) 24 March 2015
It is hoped the author and expert should honor mutual respect of each
===> Yes, agreed 100%, just to clarify, I have no comments either in my original post or subsequent posts which are contrary to what you said.
The comments of author are unwarranted and hence condemned.
===> So Sir any feedback on this "long commercial/professional query." ?
What is it supposed to be ? "Warranted" ? Was I expecting this kind of reply when I posted my original query ? Don't I have right to react to needless provocation ?
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 24 March 2015
Despite Ur attitude not warranting any solution to Ur query and adamantly sticking on to UR version, any reply is not given on demand,but only on the merits of the query, and in order to try to help X,I would like to put in my observtions.
1.X under ignorance committed to pay Y
2.Paid more than 200% of what Y had invested.
3.What was the formal agreement between the 2, written or oral.
4. if written and witnessed legally valid, if oral X can sue Y for harassment.
5. X maintained record of the payments, what kind of record is it.
6.If X can answer these there could some respite.
Guest
(Expert) 24 March 2015
Let X and Y settle their problem mutually, if there is any, or ask for solution themeselves, what you have to do in that deal and in what capacity and why picking up arguments with experts, if problem is not personally related to you?
