Dr. Brij Bhushan

R/o X-11, Type 4 Special

HUDCO Place

New Delhi-110049

……Appellant

Versus

Jindal Vijaynagar Steel (merged with)

JSW Steels, Jindal Mansion

5 A, Dr. G Deshmukh Marg,

Mumbai-400026

(Delhi Office:JSW Steels, Jindal Centre 12 Bhikaji Cama Place,

  New Delhi-110066)

......Respondent

CORAM

Salma Noor, Member, N P Kaushik Member (Judicial)

1.       Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

2.       To be referred to the reporter or not?

N P Kaushik Member (Judicial)

1. Heard on admission.
2. In brief the case of the appellant/complainant is that he purchased one thousand shares of Jindal Vijainagar Steel in the year 1995. Contention of the appellant/complainant is that he did not receive the notice relating to forfeiture of the shares from the respondent company.  Admittedly the shares were forfeited in the year 2000. Complaint in question was instituted in the year 2011 i.e. after 11 years of the forfeiture of the shares.  It is not the case of the appellant/complaint that in the aforesaid span of 11 years he ever wrote any letter to the respondent company or visited company’s office in connection with his right shares/bonus shares. Appellant/

-2 -

•  has also contended that the respondent company got merged with JSW Steels. On the contrary, in his written version, the respondent denied the averment.  The plea raised by the respondent is that it simply changed its name and no merger as contended ever took place.  Ld. District Forum vide its order dated 1.9.14 dismissed the complaint on the grounds that the same was barred by limitation.
• We have perused the impugned order and heard the appellant who is present in person. Nothing has come on record to show that during the period from 2000 uptil 2011, the complainant ever took any step for contacting the respondent company. His plea is that he came to know of the forfeiture of the shares in the year 2011.  The appellant/complainant is a highly educated person, a graduate from IIT, Kanpur and presently posted as Scientist in Govt. of India.  The plea that he was ignorant of the factum of forfeiture of the shares does not help him in any manner.  We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the complaint is badly time barred.  The trial forum has rightly dismissed the same.  There is no illegality or infirmity in order dated 1.9.14 passed by the Ld. District Forum.
• Appeal is thus dismissed  in limini.
• FDR, if any, be release in favour of appellant as per rule.  
• A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room.