In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.   24 / 2009.

1)                   Sri Monoranjan Saha,

20, Maharaja Tagore Road, Kolkata-700031.                                           ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corpn. Ltd.,

5, Ramani Chatterjee Road, Kolkata-700029.

2)                   ICICI Bank Ltd.,

2/3, Hindusthan Road, Kolkata-700029.

3)                   Intime Specturm Registry Ltd.,

C 13, Pannalal Silk Mills Compound,

LBS Marg Bhandup (W) Mumbai-400078.

4)                   Tata Steel Ltd.,

Bombay House, 24, Homi Modi Street, Fort Mumbai-400001.                  ---------- Opposite Parties

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. A. B. Chakraborty, Member

Order No.   2 6    Dated  1 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 2 .

The petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has been filed by complainant Sri Monoranjan Saha against the o.ps. HSBC Bank and others. The case of the complainant in short is that he as a share holder received an application form of Tata Steel Ltd. with an offer of six equity shares-Right issue, with provisional option to apply for more, from Intime Spectrum Registry Ltd., Registrar of the issue, and applied for twenty four shares only and due cost was fixed Rs.7200/- paid by the complainant by a crossed cheque drawn on HSBC Bank and deposited with Kolkata representative of Intime Spectrum Registry Ltd. within due date vide cheque no.209100 dt.20.12.07, debit date 26.12.07 as per HSBC’s letter dt.29.4.08. But no share was allotted against the application of the complainant due to the reason best known to them nor refunded the money so deposited. Hence the instant case with a prayer contained in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint.

            All the o.ps. had enterd their appearances in this case by filing w/vs denying all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case.

Decision with reasons:-

            We have gone through the pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced together with documents in particular. It is seen from the record that the complainant made deposit of Rs.7200/- by cheque and said amount was debited from his HSBC’s letter dt.29.4.08 on 26.12.07 and it is not clear what prompted the o.ps. not to issue the share in favour of the complainant in view of the context mentioned herein before. And we find that the o.ps. had sufficient deficiencies being service provider nor there is adequate reason for doing so for not issuing share in favour of complainant.

            We therefore in view of the above findings hold that o.ps. had sufficient deficiencies being service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief as prayed for.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. O.ps. are hereby directed to issue twenty four equity shares @ Rs.300/- (Rupees three hundred) only per share in favour of the complainant together with interest at the rate prevalent and are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue over the total sum due to the credit of the complainant till the date of realization. 

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.

   ____Sd-____                                                   _______Sd-__________

     MEMBER                                                           PRESIDENT