Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/272/2012

R.Chandrasaker - Complainant(s)

Versus

Way Wealth Brokers Pvt Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

G. Gopalakrishnan

07 Aug 2015

ORDER

                                                                         Date of Filing :   31.10.2012

                                                                        Date of Order :   07.08.2015.

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L.,                      : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K.AMALA, M.A.L.L.B.,                                   : MEMBER II

                             C.C.NO.272/2012

FRIDAY THIS 7^th DAY OF AUGUST 2015

Mr. R.Chandrasekar,

S/o. S.V.Ramamoorthy,

at 10-A/15, Bashyam Nagar 2^nd Street,

Chromepet,

Chennai 600 044.                                                  ..Complainant

                                                 ..Vs..

1.  The Regional Manager,

Mrs. Way 2 Wealth Brokers Pvt. Ltd.,

2^nd Floor Palsak Villa,

No.10, Seethammal Colony,

2^nd Main Road,

Alwarpet,

Chennai 600 018.

2. The Sales Manager,

M/s. way 2 wealth brokers Pvt. Ltd.,

No.51, North Boag Road,

(Rear to kovai pazhai mudhir soolai),

T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017.                                      .. Opposite parties.

For the Complainant             :  M/s. Gopalakrishnan & others.      

For the Opposite parties       :  Party in person     

        This complaint is being filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the C.P. Act 1986 for a direction to the opposite parties to issue a certified hard copy of the ledger statement from 29.9.11 to till the date of closing of his DP account and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- for mental agony with cost of proceedings to the complainant.      

ORDER

THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT        

1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-

         The complainant had opened a share DP account with the opposite parties on 29.9.2011 vide complainant ID No.10480322 DP ID IN303077 and complainant code No.BC 789 during the course of operation with the opposite parties the complainant had suffered untold sufferings by debiting a sum of Rs.350/- unnecessarily and there after due to the complainant’s intervention by making several phone calls and emails, the opposite parties have given credit to the complainant’s account, thereby caused mental agony to the complainant.    He had sent several mails to Chennai office and other concerned department person requesting them to close his DP account.  He had also requested them to send the account closing forms and other formalities and any enclosure to be sent along with the account closing forms.  But the opposite parties never sent him the Hard copy and instead the opposite parties have sent the account closing form via email and asked him to take print out.    Despite of several demands made by the complainant,  legal notice and reminder sent by the complainant to the opposite parties  and received the same  but the opposite parties have failed to comply the conditions.    As such the act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.  As such the complainant has sought to issue a certified hard copy of the ledger statement from 29.9.2011 to till the date of closing of his DP account and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- for mental agony with cost of proceedings to the complainant.       Hence the complaint.      

Written version of  opposite parties  is  as follows:-

2.      It denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein.    The complainant was an online client and had opened a Demat account and was advised that demat charges of Rs.350/- would be applicable to all client and such charges would be collected.  However subsequently complainant requested the opposite parties to reverse these charges which as requested by the complainant were reversed and the same is admitted by the complainant.   The complainant is now harassing the opposite parties for reversing the charges even though opposite party was entitled to charge the fees towards the demat account maintenance.   The opposite parties stated that the complainant submitted his demat account closure form only on 17.3.2012 and his account was closed on 25.4.2012 only after complainant submitted the blank depository instructions booklet that was given to the complainant when his account was opened which the complainant admittedly avers.    It is a general industry practice with a view to safeguarding the interest of the investor/s during account closures of demat account that any and all blank depository instructions booklet / slips are to be returned back to the depositary participant who in this instant case is the opposite parties.   The opposite parties has duly forwarded Electronic Contract Notes, Ledger, statements of accounts on the email ID provided by the complainant himself i.e. chandrasekar

3.     Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and  Ex.A1 to Ex.A11 were marked on the side of the complainant.    Opposite parties have filed their proof affidavit and Ex.B1 to Ex.B3 were marked on the side of the opposite parties.  

4.         The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties ?

2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

5. POINTS 1 & 2 :

        Perused the both side pleadings and the proof affidavit of both parties  and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A11  filed on the side of the complainant and the documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B3  filed on the side of the opposite parties  and considered the both side arguments.    Though the complainant has raised the allegation against the opposite parties regarding debiting of charges and maintenance charges for the DP account maintained by him with the opposite parties and the opposite parties have not closed the said account despite of his request made by him and necessary communication have not been properly sent to the complainant, as per the written version filed by the opposite parties and the documents Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 in respect of the D.P. account of the complainant has proved that they have sent the communication by email in respect of the said account to the complainant regularly and they were received by the complainant as per Ex.B1.   It has not been specifically denied by the complainant.   Further the opposite parties has categorically admitted in the written version that as per closer form submitted by the complainant on 17.3.2012 the said account of the complainant with the opposite party was closed on 25.4.2012 and as per Ex.B3 copy of the statement of the said account filed by the opposite party there is no due is shown by the complainant to the opposite party as on 15.3.2012.  Therefore the grievance raised by the complainant in the complaint with regard to the charges made by the opposite parties in the said account towards the maintenance charges of the said account were also appeared to be paid by the complainant then and there and there is no due by the complainant for the opposite party in the said account as per Ex.B3.  There is no issue in this regard need to be arised and decided by this forum. 

6.    However they main grievance remain to be raised and decided by this forum is that the opposite parties have not issued the necessary certificate hard copy of the ledger statement from 29.9.2011 to till the date of closing his D.P account to the complainant despite of several demands made by the complainant and the legal notice and reminder sent by the complainant to the opposite parties.  In this regard though the opposite parties as mentioned above has categorically admitted that the said D.P account of the complainant was closed on receipt of the closure form of the complainant on 25.4.2012, they have not stated anything that they have duly informed the same to the complainant and have sent necessary certificate of closure of the said account to the complainant and there is no proof of the same also filed on the side of opposite parties.  Therefore though the opposite parties have closed the said DP account as requested by the complainant on 25.4.2012  it has not been intimated and necessary certificate for closure of the said account have not been sent to the complainant.  

7.     Further though the complainant has issued a legal notice dated 20.5.2012 and sent reminder  in respect of the same dated 7.10.2012 to the complainant as per Ex.A1 and Ex.A3 the opposite parties neither replied nor complied the demand made by the complainant in the above said notice.  Therefore the non intimation of the closure of the account and not sending necessary certificate to the complainant regarding closure of the said account and not replied for the above said notice sent by the complainant in Ex.A1 & Ex.A2 by the opposite parties  were compelled the complainant to file this complaint is acceptable.  

8.     Therefore we are of the considered view that the opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to issue necessary certificate for closure of complaint mentioned D.P. account BC 789 bearing NO.DPID No.IN303077 of the complainant maintained with them and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as cost of this proceedings to the complainant.    Contrary to this the contention  made by the opposite parties that the complainant itself is not maintainable since it relates to demat account which is relating to purchase and selling of shares as relate to business transaction is not acceptable.  Since the complainant is not dealt with large number of shares for purchase and selling and though the said account relates to purchase and selling of shares the same was done by the complainant for earning of his livelihood, which proves by the meager transaction mentioned in Ex.B3 the said contention of the opposite parties that this compliant is not maintainable and has to be dismissed is not acceptable and as such the points 1 & 2 are answered in favour of the complainant.

9.     However  considering the facts and circumstances of the case the complainant is not entitled for any compensation sought for in the complaint against the opposite parties.

         In the  result,  the complaint is partly allowed.  The opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to issue necessary certificate for closure of compliant mentioned DP account BC 789 bearing No.DPID No.IN303077 of the complainant maintained with them and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as cost of this proceedings to the complainant within six weeks  from the date of receipt of copy of this order.  

 Dictated to the Assistant transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this  7^th   day of August  2015.

MEMBER-II                                                                                                      PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s Side documents :

Ex.A1- 20.5.2012      - Copy of legal notice issued to the opposite parties.

Ex.A2-                    -        - Copy of Acknowledgment along with receipt.

Ex.A3- 7.10.2012      - Copy of reminder notice issued to the opposite parties.

Ex.A4-                    -        - Copy of Acknowledgment card along with receipt.

Ex.A5- 16.3.2012      - Copy of email from opposite party and reply by complainant.

Ex.A6- 17.3.2012      - Copy of email by complainant to the opposite party.

Ex.A7- 22.3.2012      - Copy of email by complainant to the Sebi.

Ex.A8- 26.3.2012      - Copy of reply letter from NSDL to the opposite party.

Ex.A9- 13.4.2012      - Copy of reply from NSDL to the complainant. 

Ex.A10-25.6.2012      - Copy of email from opposite party regarding DP account.

Ex.A11- 1.10.11 to

           28.4.12        - Copy of bank statement of the complainant.

Opposite parties’ side documents: -    

Ex.B1-                    -        - Copy of SMS Log Report.

Ex.B2-                   -        - Copy of Demat Transaction statement

Ex.B3-                   -        - Copy of Financial Statement.

MEMBER-II                                                                                                      PRESIDENT.