1. Where a company fails to repay the deposit or part thereof or any interest thereon referred to in section 74 within the time specified in sub-section (1 ) of that section or such further time as may be allowed by the Tribunal under sub-section (2 ) of that section, and it is proved that the deposits had been accepted with intent to defraud the depositors or for any fraudulent purpose, every officer of the company who was responsible for the acceptance of such deposit shall, without prejudice to the provisions contained in subsection (3 ) of that section and liability under section 447, be personally responsible, without any limitation of liability, for all or any of the losses or damages that may have been incurred by the depositors.
2. Any suit, proceedings or other action may be taken by any person, group of persons or any association of persons who had incurred any loss as a result of the failure of the company to repay the deposits or part thereof or any interest thereon.
Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 75
Section 75 imposes unlimited, personal joint and several liability on officers who accepted deposits with intent to defraud depositors or for any fraudulent purpose upon failure to repay under Section 74, overriding the corporate veil without prejudice to concurrent criminal prosecution under Section 447.
In depositor recovery proceedings before the NCLT or civil courts, plead specific averments demonstrating knowledge and active participation of each named director in the deposit scheme. Rely on Section 75 to seek ex-parte interim injunctions restraining the alienation of personal immovable assets and bank accounts of promoters and KMPs, invoking the strict evidentiary presumption of fraud once default under Section 74 is established.