JSW Steel Limited, JSW Centre, BandraKurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 (Email: jswsl.investor@jsw.in).
………….. Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT
BEFORE: Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member
Sh. D.M. Yadav, Member
Present:- Shri Namit Jain, Advocate for complainants.
OP no. 1 & 2 exparte vide order dated 05.05.2023.
ORDER:-
Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member:
1. Brief facts of the case, as per complainants are that complainant number 1 is a super senior citizen aged more than 80 years old man and is also a physically disabled person. Both the complainants having 510 shares certificates in the joint names, which were allotted by the opposite party no. 2 that is JSW Steel Limited. Further, it is alleged that the respondent no. 1 is working as a registrar for the respondent no.2, keeping and maintaining the records of shares. The complainants submitted application for dematerialization of 510 shares certificates to the respondent no. 1 through Indus Portfolio, who is the agent but the respondent no. 1 repeatedly rejected the request of the complainants of dematerialization of 510 share certificates on the mere ground that “Signature Mismatch”, as intimated vide his last letter dated 08.03.2023, while complainants submitted duly completed documents as per guidelines of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and as instructed by Assistant General Manager of opposite party no. 1, while vide his letter dated 05.04.2019 as earlier the same request was declined by the opposite party no.1 with the same objection “Signature mismatch”, however, both the complainants have submitted their specimen of signatures duly attested and verified by Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Mini Sectt. Bhiwani, along with an affidavit duly attested by Notary, Govt. of India , other required documents were also submitted to the respondent no.1 as he desired vide his letter dated 05.04.2019, inspite of that the respondent no.1 has rejected the request of the complainants for demat of shares on frivolous ground, without pointing out the further remedial way that in what manner the signatures of the complainants will match and how the shares can be got dematerialized. Respondent no. 1 is share registry of respondent no. 2 and is a service provider as per statuary requirement of SEBI rules. Further it is alleged that lastly on 15.03.2023, complainants forwarded a complaint message through whatsapp on the mobile number of respondent no.1 but the opposite party no.1 gives no reply. The request for dematerialization of shares is a valuable right of the consumer for transfer of shares because in the absence of dematerialization of shares in the demat account, the shares cannot be transferred under the law, due to this, complainants unable to transfer the shares to their relatives which they wants to do due to their old age and resulting in suffering from mental agony and physical harassment due to the wrong, negligent and irresponsible action and conduct of the respondent no. 1. The act of the opposite party no. 1 is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party no. 1 may kindly be directed to accept the request for dematerialization of shares of the complainant without any delay and may kindly be directed to pay the compensation amounting to Rs.2,00,000/- for physical harassment, mental agony and monetary loss being caused on daily basis due to fluctuation in rates of the shares by not dematerializing the shares in time. Further, the respondent no. 1 may be directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as litigation charges to the complainant in the interest of justice, as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of the complaint, notices were issued but opposite parties did not appear in spite of due service effected through registered post and as such they were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 05.05.2023 of this Commission.
3. Learned counsel for the complainants in his evidence has tendered affidavit of complainants Exhibit CW1/A, documents Annexure C-1 to C-6 and Annexure C-A to C-C, and closed the evidence on 15.06.2023.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainants and gone through the record of the case available on the file thoroughly.
5. In the present case, the only issue involved in whether the reasons for rejection of demat the shares of the complainants are valid or not by the opposite party no. 1. The complainants have deposed that the opposite party no. 1 rejected the request of the complainant for dematerialization of 510 shares by his letter dated 05.04.2019 Annexure CA, mentioning the reasons for rejection- “Signature mismatch” and directed to re-lodge the application after rectifying the deficiency and mentioned the required documents such as;
1) Affidavit required on Rs.100/- Non Judicial Stamp paper with Notary attestation
2) Holder(s) signature (s) attested by holder (s) Bank Branch Manager (Preferably a Nationalized Bank) along with details of signing official’s name, employee code, contact no. and address of the bank/branch.
3) Self-attested copy of PAN card.
4) Self-attested copy of Adhar card.
After that as per direction of the letter dated 05.04.2019 Annexure C-A, the complainants have re-submitted the afore-said duly completed documents in original to the opposite party no. 1 through Indus Portfolio Private Limited, the broker with whom the complainants having demat account, copy of documents which are marked as Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-6 but again the opposite party no. 1 rejected the request of the complainants for dematerialization of shares on the same ground “Signature mismatch” vide his letter dated 08.03.2023 that is Annexure C-B.
6. The aforesaid version of the complainants is duly supported by the documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-6 which shows that the complainants have submitted documents as per the requirements of the opposite party no. 1 even certificate of specimen of signature of both the complainants which was duly attested and verified by the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Mini Sectt. Bhiwani duly completed in all respect which is Annexure C-3 alongwith affidavit (for change of signature) on non-judicial stamp paper Rs.100/- duly attested by Notary that is Annexure C-2, in spite of that the opposite party no. 1 has rejected the application on the ground “Signature mismatch” is quite unlawful and unjustified. Moreover, finding no way that in what manner the signatures will match and how the shares can be got dematerialized the complainant aged 81 years old man, super senior citizen forwarded a complaint message to the opposite party no. 1 through whatsapp on the mobile number 9100094099 on 15.03.2023 but he did not pay any heed towards their repeated requests. Not only this, the opposite parties dared not to appear before this Commission in spite of due service effected through registered post and opted to remain exparte. As such, the aforesaid pleaded version of the complainants goes un-rebutted and unchallenged which is liable to be accepted being trustworthy. Even otherwise, rejected the request for dematerialization of shares repeatedly on the same ground even after completed all the necessary formalities and not dematerialize the shares of the complainants by the opposite party no. 1 is illegal and unjustified and certainly a deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties for which the complainants cannot be left to suffer for not fault on their part. The complainants cannot be left to live in misery and wait indefinitely at the mercy of the opposite parties. Thus, the conduct of the opposite parties shows grave deficiency on his part. The both complainants must have suffered tremendous mental tension, harassment and financial loss.
7. Resultantly, in view of the above discussion and for the foregoing reasons, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party no. 1 to dematerialize the 510 shares in the demat account of the complainants within 15 days after receiving the original share certificate and complainants are also directed to provide the original share certificate of 510 shares to the respondent no. 1 within a week on his demand and also directed to disburse pending dividend which is not paid due to non-dematerialized shares of the complainants. The complainants are also awarded compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) for mental agony and harassment besides litigation expenses which are quantified at Rs.5500/- (Rupees five thousand five hundred only) against the opposite parties. The compliance of this order be made within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 27.3.2023 till its realization.
Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Commission.
Dated: - 17.08.2023
(D.M.Yadav) (Saroj Bala Bohra)
Member. Presiding Member,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Bhiwani.
Present:- Shri Namit Jain, Advocate for complainants.
OP no. 1 & 2 exparte vide order dated 05.05.2023.
Arguments heard. Vide separate detailed order of even date, the present complaint stands allowed. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Dt:17.08.2023 Member. Presiding Member,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Bhiwani.
.
