In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.327/2011
1) Sri Amit Bhansali,
44/1, G.T. Road (North), 4th Floor,
P.S. Golabari, Howrah-711101. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Systematix Shares & Stocks (I) Ltd.,
Tobacco House, 2nd Floor,
1, Old Court House Corner,
P.S. Hare Street, Kolkata-1.
2) Systematix Shares & Stocks (I) Ltd.,
2nd Floor, J.K. Somani Building, British Lane,
Bombay Samachar Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400001.
3) Link In Time India Pvt. Ltd. (Unit Coal India Ltd.),
C-13, Pannalal Silk Mills Compound, L.B.S. Marg,
Bhandup (West), Mumbai-400001. ---------- Opposite Parties
1) The Regional Manager, SEBI, East Zone,
L & T Chambers, 3rd Floor, 16, Camac Street,
P.S. Park Street, Kolkata-17.
2) Company Secretary Coal India Ltd.,
Coal Bhavan, 10 Netaji Subhas Road,
P.S. Hare Street, Kolkata-1.
3) Compliance Officer Coal India Ltd.
Coal Bhavan, 10, Netaji Subhas Road,
P.S. Hare Street, Kolkata-1.
4) Mr. Rajesh Kumar Saw,
New Jyoti Station Tailor Road, Jharia,
Near Satyanarayan Mandir, P.S. Jharia, Dhanbad-828111. ---------- Proforma Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 18 Dated 29-05-2013.
The case of the complainant in short is that proforma o.p. no.1 is the statutory controlling officer of all kind of share related transactions and being informed about the complaint, he has advised the complainant to take the shelter of law if necessary but being a statutory office it is required to make it a party in the instant case but as no specific relief has been claimed against him or his office as such no prior notice as envisaged u/s 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure is required. Proforma o.p. nos.2 and 3 are the officers of that company whose shares have been floated and the complainant has applied for.
O.p. nos.1 and 2 are the Syndicate and the Kolkata office and the Registered office have been made a party and the relief has been sought against them. O.p. no.3 is the Registrar of the Issue and upon the wrong advice of o.p. nos.1 and 2 it has issued the shares and refunded the money wrongly in credit of another person the proforma o.p. no.4.
Proforma o.p. no.4 is the person with whom the complainant has no privity of contract but as per th e statements made by o.p. nos. 1, 2 and 3 the complainant has the responsible apprehension that due to the mistake of the o.p. nos.1 to 3, the proforma o.p. no.4 has made wrongful gain and thereby causing wrongful loss to the complaint.
Complainant has applied for 200 equity shares in IPO of Coal India Ltd. in the month of Octob er 2010 and he has already paid the required amount of Rs.49,000/- vide cheque no.352234 dt.18.10.10, drawn on ICICI Bank Ltd. Howrah Branch and the same was credited in favour of ESCROW AC COAL INDIA on 25.10.10.
The bank statement dt.31.10.10 and the acknowledgement slip for bidder and the syndicate member vide no.43912885 are on record. The details of the said transaction is as follows:
i) Name of the Applicant : Mr. Amit Bhansali
ii) Bid cum Application Form No.43912885
iii) DP Name – Shivmangal Securities Pvt. Ltd.
iv) DP ID – IN 302252
v) Beneficiary Account No. – 10069450
vi) No. of Equity shares applied – 200
vii) Date of Application Form – 18th October 2010
viii) Name of syndicate Member – Systematix Shares & Stocks India Ltd. Kolkata.
Immediately the complainant raised the issue before the statutory complaining authority by internet through Investor Grievance Submission Format on 23.11.10 and to the Registrar of the Issue i.e. o.p. no.3 by letter dt.11.11.10 and to the Syndicate member i.e. o.p. no.1 on 9.3.11 and the said o.p. no.3 responded to the letter of the complainant and informed that due to mistake of the Syndicate member i.e. o.p. nos.1 and 2 bid for those shares have been wrongly credited to the account of the proforma o.p. no.4.
Complainant had instructed his ld. advocate Mr. Supriyo Kumar Ray to issue a legal letter to the said Syndicate member and as such the legal letter dt.24.5.11 was issued to the said syndicate member and the same was received by the head office as well as Kolkata office on 30.5.11 and 26.5.11. Similarly, a legal letter was issued on 21.4.11 to the registrar of issue. The photocopies of the said legal letter and the postal receipt and the detaild movement and delivery report downloaded from the internet maintained by the postal authority.
After receiving the legal letter the said Syndicate member i.e. o.p. no.1 had also wrote a letter dt.6.6.11 to the said proforma o.p. no.4 admitting their fault and had asked him to return the favour which he had wrongfully retained but no relief has been provided to the complainant till date. The letter written to the proforma o.p. no.4 by o.p. no.1.
Similarly the said Registrar of Issue i.e. o.p. no.3 had also wrote a letter dt.31.3.11 to the said proforma o.p. no.4 admitting their fault and had asked him to return the favour which he had wrongully retained but no relief has been provided to the complainant till date. The letter written to the proforma o.p. no.4 by the o.p. no.3.
O.p. nos.1 to 3 due to their mistake and deficiency in service had caused heavy loss to the complainant and as such they are severally and jointly liable to compensate the complainant. Complainant states that the 52 weeks high of the said share is of Rs.42230/- and as such the complainant has a loss of Rs.42230/- Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
O.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. in the course of argument submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that proforma o.p. no.1 is the statutory controlling officer of all kind of share related transactions and being informed about the complaint, he has advised the complainant to take the shelter of law if necessary but being a statutory office it is required to make it a party in the instant case but as no specific relief has been claimed against him or his office as such no prior notice as envisaged u/s 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure is required. Proforma o.p. nos.2 and 3 are the officers of that company whose shares have been floated and the complainant has applied for.
And o.p. nos.1 and 2 are the Syndicate and the Kolkata office and the Registered office have been made a party and the relief has been sought against them. O.p. no.3 is the Registrar of the Issue and upon the wrong advice of o.p. nos.1 and 2 it has issued the shares and refunded the money wrongly in credit of another person the proforma o.p. no.4.
And proforma o.p. no.4 is the person with whom the complainant has no privity of contract but as per th e statements made by o.p. nos. 1, 2 and 3 the complainant has the responsible apprehension that due to the mistake of the o.p. nos.1 to 3, the proforma o.p. no.4 has made wrongful gain and thereby causing wrongful loss to the complaint.
We further find from the record that complainant has applied for 200 equity shares in IPO of Coal India Ltd. in the month of Octob er 2010 and he has already paid the required amount of Rs.49,000/- vide cheque no.352234 dt.18.10.10, drawn on ICICI Bank Ltd. Howrah Branch and the same was credited in favour of ESCROW AC COAL INDIA on 25.10.10.
The bank statement dt.31.10.10 and the acknowledgement slip for bidder and the syndicate member vide no.43912885 are on record. The details of the said transaction is as follows:
ix) Name of the Applicant : Mr. Amit Bhansali
x) Bid cum Application Form No.43912885
xi) DP Name – Shivmangal Securities Pvt. Ltd.
xii) DP ID – IN 302252
xiii) Beneficiary Account No. – 10069450
xiv) No. of Equity shares applied – 200
xv) Date of Application Form – 18th October 2010
xvi) Name of syndicate Member – Systematix Shares & Stocks India Ltd. Kolkata.
It seen from the record that Immediately the complainant raised the issue before the statutory complaining authority by internet through Investor Grievance Submission Format on 23.11.10 and to the Registrar of the Issue i.e. o.p. no.3 by letter dt.11.11.10 and to the Syndicate member i.e. o.p. no.1 on 9.3.11 and the said o.p. no.3 responded to the letter of the complainant and informed that due to mistake of the Syndicate member i.e. o.p. nos.1 and 2 bid for those shares have been wrongly credited to the account of the proforma o.p. no.4.
It is also seen that complainant had instructed his ld. advocate Mr. Supriyo Kumar Ray to issue a legal letter to the said Syndicate member and as such the legal letter dt.24.5.11 was issued to the said syndicate member and the same was received by the head office as well as Kolkata office on 30.5.11 and 26.5.11. Similarly, a legal letter was issued on 21.4.11 to the registrar of issue. The photocopies of the said legal letter and the postal receipt and the detaild movement and delivery report downloaded from the internet maintained by the postal authority.
It transpires from the record that after receiving the legal letter the said Syndicate member i.e. o.p. no.1 had also wrote a letter dt.6.6.11 to the said proforma o.p. no.4 admitting their fault and had asked him to return the favour which he had wrongfully retained but no relief has been provided to the complainant till date. The letter written to the proforma o.p. no.4 by o.p. no.1.
Similarly the said Registrar of the Issue i.e. o.p. no.3 had also wrote a letter dt.31.3.11 to the said proforma o.p. no.4 admitting their fault and had asked him to return the favour which he had wrongully retained but no relief has been provided to the complainant till date. The letter written to the proforma o.p. no.4 by the o.p. no.3.
O.p. nos.1 to 3 due to their mistake and deficiency in service had caused heavy loss to the complainant and as such they are severally and jointly liable to compensate the complainant. Complainant states that the 52 weeks high of the said share is of Rs.42230/- and as such the complainant has a loss of Rs.42230/-.
In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we find that o.p. nos.1, 2 and 3 had sufficient deficiency in service being service provider to their consumers / complainants and complainants are entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed on contest with cost against o.p. nos.1, 2 and 3 and without cost against o.p. no.4. O.p. nos.1, 2 and 3 are jointly and/or severally directed to pay to the complainants Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.7000/- (Rupees seven thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
