Ashok Kumar filed a consumer case on 31 Jul 2007 against Reliance Industries Ltd. in the Bhatinda Consumer Court. The case no is CC/07/48 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Nov -0001.
Punjab
Bhatinda
CC/07/48
Ashok Kumar - Complainant(s)
Versus
Reliance Industries Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)
Shri Sanjay Goyal Advocate
31 Jul 2007
ORDER
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bathinda (Punjab) District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Govt. House No. 16-D, Civil Station, Near SSP Residence, Bathinda-151 001 consumer case(CC) No. CC/07/48
Ashok Kumar
...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA (PUNJAB) CC No.48 of 19-02-2007 Decided on : 31-07-2007 Ashok Kumar S/o Pat Ram, R/o Birla Mill Colony, Bathinda. ... Complainant Versus 1.Reliance Industries Limited (Erstwhile Reliance Petroleum Limited) through its Managing Director having its Registered Office at Village Motikhavdi, P.O. Digvijay Gram, Distt. Jamnaga, Gujarat. 2.Reliance Industries Limited, Unit M/s. Karvy Computershare Pvt. Ltd., through its Manager/Authorised person 2048, The Mall, Bathinda (Deleted vide order dated 30.7.07). 3.Team Karvy through its authorised person/Mahavir Bansal, Near HDFC Bank, G.T. Road, Bathinda.(Deleted vide order dated 25.7.07). 4.Karvy Computershare Private Limited, Reliance Industries Limited, 16 Avenue Street No. 1, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. ... Opposite parties Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. QUORUM : Sh. Lakhbir Singh, President Sh. Hira Lal Kumar, Member For the Complainant : Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Advocate. For the Opposite parties : Exparte O R D E R LAKHBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT 1. Instant one is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Here-in-after referred to as 'Act') which has been preferred by the complainant seeking direction from this forum to the opposite parties to release him 81 shares of Reliance Industries Limited or in the alternative value thereof at the prevailing rate; pay Rs. 20,000/- as compensation for mental tension and Rs. 5500/- as cost of litigation. 2. Briefly put the version of the complainant is that he is holder of 400 equity shares of Reliance Petroleum Limited details of which are as under :- Folio No. Certificate No. Distinctive Nos Qnty 19189830 5342527 761997401 to 761997500 100 19189830 2663 257801 to 257900 100 19189830 6501476 to 77 916609101 to 916609200 200 Shares of Reliance Petroleum Limited were converted into Reliance Industries Limited. For that purposes complainant was told by Reliance Industries Limited Unit M/s. Karvy Computershare Private Limited which is the the agent of opposite party No. 1 to submit all the 400 shares. He did so for their conversion. Despite this, he did not receive shares of Reliance Industries Limited. He paid visits to Reliance Industries Limited unit M/s. Karvy Computershare Private Limited and also gave in writing. He was told that he has been issued 81 shares of Reliance Industries Limited bearing Certificate No. 58344467. These shares were not received by him and are in possession of the opposite parties. He was informed by M/s. Reliance Industries Limited unit M/s Karvy Computershare Private Limited that infact his shares of Reliance Industries Limited have been wrongly given to some other person having the same name i.e. Ashok Kumar. They have been damated in the account of that wrong person and he has further sold them. Team Karvy, Bathinda had sent letter dated 23.1.06 to the Seniors of the opposite parties and reply dated 26.1.06 was given by Mohd Muslihuddin Irfan to Mahavir Bansal of Team Karvy. Despite this, neither the shares of Reliance Industries Limited nor the amount has been paid to him (complainant) till date. He alleges deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. According to him office of opposite party No. 2 is at Bathinda. Shares were applied from Bathinda and were received by him at Bathinda. 3. Registered A.D. post notice was issued to opposite party No. 1 on 2.3.07. Neither registered cover nor AD was received till 5.4.07. 30 days had elapsed. Accordingly, opposite party No. 1 was deemed to have been duly served. No-one came present on its behalf. Hence it has been proceeded against exparte. 4. Opposite party No. 2 filed reply of the complaint stating that there is no office of M/s. Karvy Computer Share Private Limited at Bathinda. All work relating to M/s, Karvy Computershare Private Limited is carried out at Hyderabad and the address is as under :- M/s. Karvy Computershare Private Limited Unit - Reliance Industries Limited 46 Avenue Street No. 1, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. Complainant is required to contact M/s Karvy Computer Shares Private Limited. 5. Opposite party No. 3 was arrayed by the complainant. Notice was given to it. Report was received that opposite party No. 3 is not existing at the given address. 6. Opposite party No. 4 was arrayed on the basis of the application moved by the complainant. It was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 17.7.07. 7. In support of his averments contained in the complaint, complainant has produced in evidence his affidavit (Ex. C-1), photocopy of E-mail (Ex. C-2), photocopies of share certificates (Ex. C-3 to Ex. C-6) and photocopy of letter dated 12.12.05 (Ex. C-7) 8. In rebuttal, on behalf of opposite party No. 2 affidavit of Sh. Prem Kumar (Ex. R-1) and photocopy of lease deed (Ex. R-2) have been tendered in evidence. 9. On the basis of the statement made by the learned counsel for the complainant, names of opposite parties No. 2 & 3 have been ordered to be deleted from the array of the opposite parties. 10. We have heard leaned counsel for the parties. Besides this, we have gone through the record. 11. Complainant reiterates his version in the complaint in his affidavit Ex. C-1. Ex. C-4 to Ex. C-6 prove that complainant was the holder of 400 shares of Reliance Petroleum Limited. As per Ex. C-1 he had submitted these 400 shares to Reliance Industries Limited unit M/s Karvy Computershare Private Limited for their conversion. He did not receive the shares of Reliance Industries Limited after conversion. Matter was brought to the notice of M/s. Karvy Computershare Private Limited. Mahavir Bansal of Team Karvy, Bathinda through E-Mail took up the matter with the Seniors admitting that complainant is the holder of Reliance Petroleum 400 shares in Folio No. 019189830 and that 81 shares of Reliance Industries Limited were allotted to him against Reliance Petroleum Limited shares. It is further in the E-mail, copy of which is Ex. C-2 that shares allotted to the complainant were wrongly demated in the same named person who demated the shares and sold them. In response to the E- Mail Mohd Muslihuddin Irfan sent reply through E- Mail to Mahavir Bansal confirming that they are taking up the matter with the company and the case is under pipeline. Despite this, nothing has been done so far. Complainant also sent letter to Reliance Industries Limited Unit Karvy Computershare Private Limited, Hyderabad, copy of which is Ex. C-7. No relief has been accorded to him. Hence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties No. 1 & 4 are proved as the evidence of the complainant has gone unchallenged and unrebutted as these opposite parties have not mustered courage to contest the complaint. 12. Now the question arises as to which relief should be accorded to the complainant. In view of our foregoing discussion, direction deserves to be given to opposite parties No. 1 & 4 to issue certificate of 81 shares of Reliance Industries Limited in the name of the complainant or in the alternative pay the value of 81 shares at the prevailing rate. Complainant is craving for compensation of Rs. 20,000/- on account of mental tension. Facts and circumstances show that complainant must have undergone mental tension for which he deserves some compensation which we assess as Rs. 2,000/-. For this, we are fortified from the observation of Hon'ble State Commission of Madhya Pradesh in the case of J. Radhakrishnan Vs. A Basheera & Another 2001(2) CLT 225 wherein it has been held that award of compensation always involves some sort of speculation and it is very difficult to quantify the amount of compensation on a rationale basis. 13. No other point was urged before us at the time of arguments. 14. In the premises written above, complaint is allowed against opposite parties No. 1 & 4 with cost of Rs. 1,000/-. Opposite parties No. 1 & 4 are directed to do as under :- i)Issue certificate of 81 shares of Reliance Industries Limited in the name of complainant or in the alternative pay him the value of 81 shares at the prevailing rate. ii) Pay Rs. 2,000/- as compensation under Section 14(1)(d) of the Act. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of its copy failing which the amount of compensation under Section 14(1)(d) would carry interest @ 9% P.A. till payment. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to record room. Pronounced : 31-07-2007 (Lakhbir Singh ) President ( Hira Lal Kumar ) Member
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.