SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER)<br /> <br /> Sri. Jayaprakash M.V. has filed this complaint before the Forum, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The contentions are that in response to the offer of the opposite party to issue rights shares to the existing share holders of the company the complainant submitted an application by registered post to the opposite party in the composite application form issued by the company together with a DD for Rs.43,750/-. But he has not obtained any share or refund of the said amount. He contacted the opposite party in several times. The opposite party after a long time, informed him that they have not obtained the application form. But after verification, they have traced out the application and they further requested to send a new DD for Rs.3175/- as the cost of 21 shares allotted to the complainant, and for purchasing and credit the shares in the demat a/c of the complainant. On 7.10.06 the complainant sent the DD – since the opposite party failed to credit the shares to his demat a/c. But they informed the complainant that they have not received the DD and further requested to cancel the draft and send a new one since they are in process of crediting the shares in his account. In the mean time M/s.Karvy Computers Pvt. Ltd. has been replaced by Amtrac Management Service Ltd. as the Registrars of Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.; complainant enquired about the Draft. They have encashed the DD on 6.2.07. But they informed him that they have not received the draft and asked him to cancel the draft and requested to send a new draft. It is the outcome of denial of issue of right shares to the complainant. Due to the above actions of the opposite party, he sustained financial losses and physical strain. Hence this complaint for compensation.<br /> 2. Notice was sent to the opposite party. They entered appearance and filed version. In the version it is stated that they have not provided any services to the complainant nor has the complainant availed of service from the opposite party and that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction. It is stated that the opposite party was only the Registrars for a specific purpose; and after the issue of the records have been handed over to the Regular Registrars. The opposite party has stated that the complainant has made an exaggerated claim towards the compensation.<br /> 3. Considering the contentions of the opposite party this Forum has raised the issues:-<br /> (1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?<br /> (2) Costs and compensation.<br /> <br /> 4. Issues (1) & (2):- On the side of the complainant he has produced 9 documents in evidence. Ext.A1 to A9 were marked. Ext.A1 is the letter addressed to the complainant, by the opposite party. Ext.A2 is the letter dt. 7th September, 2006 of the opposite party to the complainant regarding the loss of DD in their custody. Ext.A3 is the letter dt. 28.9.06 to the opposite party in connection with the forwarding of DD for Rs.3175/-. Ext.A4 is the copy of the DD for Rs.3175/- . Ext.A5 is the letter dt. 20.12.06 of the complainant to the opposite party requesting to purchase of shares. Ext.A6 is the letter of the complainant to the opposite party. Ext.A7 is the letter dt. 30.5.07 of the Securities and Exchange, Board of India regarding the complaint of the complainant. Ext.A8 is the letter of the complainant regarding the enchashment of DD by the opposite party. Ext.A9 is the letter of the complainant to the opposite party. A detailed verification of the aforesaid documents produced by the complainant in evidence, it can be seen that the opposite party has handled the matter in a most irresponsible way, when the complainant sent the DD for taking further steps, the opposite party denied the receipt of the same. After a long period they have informed the complainant about the receipt of the same. By this purpose, the complainant has suffered a lot. The opposite party has failed to discharge their duty n issuing the right shares to the complainant in time and misguide the complainant. This will clearly amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. For this matter, the opposite party is liable to pay compensation for the complaint. The acts of the opposite party is highly arbitrary, illegal and unauthorized, and there is gross negligence on the part of the opposite party in handling the matter. The issues are found in favour of the complainant. Hence, we are of the strong view that the complaint is to be allowed. <br /> In the result, we hereby direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to the complainant for his mental agony and physical strain, together with a cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) for this proceedings. We further direct the opposite party to pay the above said amounts to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. <br /> Complaint allowed.<br /> Pronounced in open Form on this the 29th day of August, 2008.<br /> <br /> Sd/- SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN:<br /> <br /> Sd/- SRI. JIMMY KORAH:<br /> <br /> Sd/- SMT. N. SHAJITHA BEEVI:<br /> <br /> APPENDIX:-<br /> <br /> Evidence of the complainant:-<br /> <br /> Ext.A1 - Letter addressed to the complainant by the opposite <br /> party. <br /> Ext.A2 - Letter dt. 7.9.06 of the opposite party to the <br /> complainant. <br /> Ext.A3 - Letter dt. 28.8.06 to the opposite party.<br /> Ext.A4 - Copy of the DD for Rs.3175/-.<br /> Ext.A5 - Letter dt. 20.12.06 of the complainant to the <br /> opposite party. <br /> Ext.A6 - Letter of the complainant to the opposite party.<br /> Ext.A7 - Letter dt. 30.5.07.<br /> Ext.A8 - Letter of the complainant regarding the encashment<br /> of DD by the opposite party.<br /> Ext.A9 - Letter of the complainant to the opposite party.<br /> <br /> Evidence of the opposite party:- Nil <br /> // True Copy // By Order<br /> <br /> <br /> To Senior Superintendent<br /> Complainant/Oppo. party/S.F.<br /> Typed by:-pr/- Compared by:-<br />