Order No. 03 / 22.02.2019

          Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present.

            The case is taken up for Admission Hearing and filing documents by the complainant.

            Complainant fails to file any document in terms of order dated 14.02.2019. Heard the Ld. Advocate for the complainant who submits that the complainant had purchased 80 Nos. of shares of Tata Chemical Limited in the year 1991 and her surname has been changed after marriage. He further submits that  the complainant had made various representations to the OP to transfer those shares in the name of Sanghamitra Sarkar instead of Sanghamitra Roy after complying with all the formalities. In spite of furnishing documents, the OP dragged to transfer the shares on various pleas. Finding no other alternative, legal notice dated 27.06.2018 was sent  to the OP with a request to take immediate step for effecting the transfer of shares in the name of Snghamitra Sarkar instead of Sanghamitra Roy.  The legal notice was unattended. According to the Ld. Advocate of the complainant there is sheer deficiency in service on the part of the OP for not taking any steps regarding transfer of shares. Thus the complainant suffered mental agony.

            On perusal of the documents on record, it appears to us that the complainant had purchased 80 Nos. of shares of Tata Chemical Ltd. from the OP prior to her marriage. After marriage the complainant requested the OP to transfer those shares in the name of Sanghamitra Sarkar in place of Sanghamitra Roy. Record further speaks that complainant submitted an affidavit to the effect that Sanghamitra Roy and Sanghamitra Sarkar is the same and identical person. The OP vide their letter dated 01.06.2018 intimated the complainant that they are unable to process the request for the following reasons(s):

Copy of the Government Gazette / Marriage Certificate, duly attested by the Bank Manager/Notary Public to be submitted with regard to name change.

In terms of the letter dated 01.06.2018 the complainant furnished attestation of specimen signature of Sanghamitra Roy duly attested by Chief Manager, Bank of India, Rashbehari Branch and Affidavit duly affirmed before the Notary Public, Govt. of West Bengal.  In the said Affidavit the Notary Public did not disclose his postal address in terms of the letter dated 01.06.2018. Complainant also failed to produce her marriage certificate as desired by the OP. Thus, the OP returned the Certificates along with respective documents with a request to the complainant to remove the defects / objections. It transpires from the record that the complainant did not comply with the direction as mentioned in the letter dated 01.06.2018.. There is no deficiency of service and / or unfair trade practice on the part of the OP for not complying with the request of the complainant as she failed to comply with the direction of the OP.

It is also settled principle of law that when a complainant comes with unclean hands, he / she cannot deserve the Consumer Protection Act.  In this context, it is pertinent to mention here that Consumer Forums are not distribution centers of dole and the complainant must have strong logic for admission of the case. We decide cases on principles of natural justice applicable to both sides.

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with documents on   record we are not inclined to admit the complaint. Accordingly, the complaint case is not admitted and dismissed in limine. 
            Liberty be given to the complainant to agitate her case before any appropriate Forum / Court as per the law.