Haryana

Panchkula

CC/326/2020

PUNEET KULSHRESTHA. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI SECURITIES LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

IN PERSON.

22 Aug 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA

 

                                                       

Consumer Complaint No	:	326 of 2020
Date of Institution	:	26.10.2020
Date of Decision	:	22.08.2022

 

Puneet Kulshrestha, S/o H.C.Kulshrestha, R/o Apartment 17, GH-21, Sector-5, Mansa Devi Complex, Panchkula-134114.

    ..….Complainant

Versus                                                                  

1.     ICICI Securities Limited, SCO-43, Sector-7, Panchkula-134101.

2.     ICICI Securities Limited, ICICI Centre, H T Parekh Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020

                                                                      ……Opposite Parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019.

 

Before:              Sh. Satpal, President.

Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member.

Dr. Sushma Garg, Member.

 

For the Parties:   Complainant in person.

                        Sh. Chetan Gupta, Advocate for OPs No.1 & 2.

                       

                       

ORDER

(Satpal, President)

 

1.             The brief facts of the present complaint as alleged are that the complainant has a Demat ICICI Direct Account No.8500297402 with OP No.2.  The complainant has visited the O/o OP No.1 around the month of February, 2019 for change in address request via service request no.596207054. In this regard, he received an email from OP No.1 on 25.02.2019 that request is rejected due to “E-Adhaar copy not valid”. After that, the complainant sent a legal notice via email to both the Ops on 15.05.2019 requesting change in address. On 17^th May 2019, he received an email from OP no.2 with response as “We are not accepting E-Aadhaar copy for processing the request for address change in ICICI Direct Account. The complainant tried to connect to various representatives of both the Ops but all in vain. He lodged a complaint with SEBI through SCORES complaint registration no.SEBIE/HY19/ 0000220/1 on 22.06.2019. In lieu of the complaint lodged with SEBI, the address of the complainant was updated after a gap of eight months. It is stated that as “As per IT Act and Aadhaar Act-e-Aadhaar is an legally valid as original Aadhaar” but both Ops continue ignoring this document illegally thus causing deficiency in service and mental agony to complainant. Due to the act and conduct of the OPs, the complainant has suffered harassment, mental agony and financial loss; hence, the present complaint.

2.             Upon notices, OPs No.1 & 2 appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua complaint is not maintainable being frivolous; not come with clean hand; suppressed the true material facts; complainant does not fall under the category of the consumer. On merits, it is stated that as per the client agreement executed between the Ops and complainant and as per the Rules, Bye-Laws and Regulations of the Exchange and circulars issues there under as may be in force from time to time read with Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation, Act, 1996 the present dispute if any, has to be referred to Arbitration. It is further stated that as per the records, the complainant had applied for change of address and along with same he had submitted an E-Aadhar card copy. On 25.02.2019 the Ops sent an email to him requesting to provide New Aadhar Copy as E-Aadhar was not being accepted but the complainant failed to submit the same. Thereafter again on 17.05.2019, the Ops again sent an email to the complainant stating that in absence of the Aadhar Card the complainant can submit a subsequent address document like Passport, Voter ID, Driving License, Electricity Bills, Residence Telephone Bills. The complainant inspite of repeated requests failed to submit the documents. He was always adamant to not submit any other documents and to not visit the branch office. It is also stated that as per National Securities Depository Limited the E-Aadhaar Card was not accepted as an address proof but as a matter of good gesture the Ops took up the matter as special case and took permission for the same. As an exception the same was processed and the complainant has confirmed the change. It is stated that no error has been committed by the Ops.  Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1 & 2 and the complainant has not suffered any harassment or agony and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

3.             The complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure C-A along with document Annexure C-1 to C-5 and closed the evidence by making a separate statement. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs No.1 & 2 has tendered affidavit Annexure R/A along with documents Annexure R-1 to R-3 and closed the evidence.

4.             We have heard the complainant and the learned counsel for the OPs No.1 & 2 and gone through the entire record available on file including written arguments filed by the complainant as well as OPs, minutely and carefully.

5.             Admittedly, the main grievance of the complainant qua the incorporation of his new address in his Demat account no.8500297402 with OP No.2 has already been redressed by Ops after the submission of e-Aadhaar copy on or about 18.10.2019 by the complainant. In the present complaint, the complainant has claimed the compensation from the Ops on the ground that the Ops had taken unduly a long period of about 8 months in making necessary changes qua his address in his Demat account, thereby causing mental agony and harassment etc to the complainant.

                During arguments, the complainant while reiterating the averments made in the complaint has vehemently contended that the denial by the Ops to make changes in the address on the e-Aadhaar  basis copy in the Demat account was neither valid nor justified. It is contended that as per the IT Act and the Aadhaar Act, e-Aadhaar is as legally valid as original Aadhaar.  It is contended that during the period of 8 month while matter of transfer of his address in D-Mat was under process, the complainant was prevented from having important information pertaining to shares and dividends and thus, was harassed mentally and physically on account of lapse and deficiency on the part of the Ops.

6.             The Ops resisted the complaint by raising preliminary objections as well as on merits in their written statement. Vide first objection, it is alleged that the complainant does not fall under the category of a consumer as he was engaged in a commercial purpose while indulging into the purchase and sale of shares vide his D-Mat account in question. The said objection is rejected in view of the fact that the present grievance of the complainant is not related towards the purchase and sale of the shares vide D-Mat account but is related towards the change of address in the D-Mat account. Further, it is also not the case of the Ops that the complainant has been found indulging into sale and purchase of the shares on a vast scale.

7.             Vide second objection, it has been alleged that in view of the Clause 38 of the terms and conditions of the Agreement as executed between the complainant and Ops, the complaint, if any is/was liable to be referred to arbitrators. This objection is also rejected in view of the provision contained in Section 100 of the Consumer Protection Act that the remedy under CP Act is in addition to any other remedy available under any other law. In this regard, reliance may be placed upon the law laid down by the Hon’ble National Commission in the case titled as Vaman Nagesh Upaskar & Anr. Vs. India Infoline Ltd. & Ors. in revision petition no.2873 of 2014. On merits, the only explanation given by the Ops is that the change of address in the D-Mat account of the complainant was made as a special case on the basis of copy of e-Aadhaar.

8.             We find no justification on the part of the OPs while not taking necessary action qua the change of address in the D-Mat account of the complainant on the basis of copy of e-Adhaar. The Ops could have verified the correctness and genuineness of the e-Aadhaar as submitted by the complainant. No reasons or any plausible justification has been provided on behalf of the Ops as to why the copy of e-Aadhaar was not liable to be accepted qua the change of address. Ultimately, the Ops on the intervention of SEBI acceded to the request of the complainant and by placing reliance on the e-Aadhaar, made the necessary changes qua the address of the complainant in D-Mat account. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant was given the option vide Annexure C-2 to submit the copy of any document i.e. passport, voter card, identity card, driving license etc., in the absence of the Aadhaar, for proof of address. Therefore, it is clear that if a person submits the copy of Adhaar as proof of address then no other proof is required. As such, the copy of Adhaar as a proof of residence is a document of vital importance but the OPs had failed to attach the necessary importance to it. In the present case, the copy of e-Aadhaar was submitted by the complainant, which was as valid as copy of Aadhaar, thus, there was no valid justification  on the part of the OPs for not acting upon the copy of said e-Aadhaar to make the necessary change in the D-Mat account qua the address of the complainant.

9.             In view of the above discussion, we conclude that the OPs No.1 & 2 are liable to compensate the complainant jointly and severally as there was lapse and deficiencies on their parts while delivering the service to the complainant; hence, the complainant is entitled to relief.  

10.            As a sequel to the above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint with the following directions to the OPs No.1 & 2:-

1.     To pay a lump sum amount of Rs.2,000/- to complainant on account of mental agony, harassment and cost of litigations charges.

 

11.            The OP No.1 & 2 shall comply with the order within a period of 45 days from the date of communication of copy of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Commission for initiation of proceedings under Section 71/72 of CP Act, 2019 against the OPs No.1 & 2. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced on: 22.08.2022

 

 

 

        Dr.Sushma Garg         Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini         Satpal

                Member                  Member                                President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

                                                Satpal

                                              President