Ashwini Kumar Sharma vs BALRAM AJWANI

BRIEF facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that the complainant had been purchasing and selling shares from Ajwani & Company, Broker in Stocks and Shares. He had a running account with them. The complainant alleged certain deficiencies in the service rendered by the said broker and claimed to recover a certain amount besides compensation. The case was contested by the other side. The complaint was dismissed by the impugned order by District Forum-II on the ground that both the parties had produced voluminous documents requiring a detailed trial which was outside the purview of the Consumer Protection Act. While dismissing the complaint, the complainant was relegated to his remedy in the Civil Court. The complainant has preferred this appeal. At the time of preliminary hearing, learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that there were only five transactions which were in dispute. The appeal was, therefore, admitted. In response to the notice, reply has been filed by Mr. Balram Ajwani, who is described as sole proprietor of Ajwani & Company.

WE have heard learned Counsel for both the parties, and have gone through the records. The respondent has pleaded that the appeal is barred by limitation. The District Forum order is dated 11.8.1995. According to the appellant, application for obtaining certified copy was made on 4.10.1995 and the certified copy made available to him on 12.10.1995. The present appeal having been filed on 3.11.1995 is not barred by limitation as time for filing the appeal is reckoned from the date of communication of the order to the parties. (See Haryana Housing Board v. Housing Board Resident Welfare Association, III (1995) CPJ 28 (SC). The appeal is, therefore, held to be within limitation.

Mr. Alvi concedes that there have been a large number of transactions in the course of about two years. He further concedes that voluminous material was placed on record on both sides. The contention of Mr. Alvi, however, is that the Fora constituted under the Consumer Protection Act has powers of a Civil Court and for this proposition he relies on Section 13(4) of the Consumer Protection Act. He further submitted that sale and purchase of shares has been held to amount to service within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, and therefore, cases of deficiency relating to that service can be dealt with by the Fora constituted under the Act.

AFTER hearing both the parties and going through the record we are of the view that the appeal has no merit and the same must, therefore, fail. According to the respondent, a large number of transactions of sale and purchase of shares from time to time took place in the course of more than two years. Quite a number of these transactions were on verbal instructions. For a satisfactory disposal of the dispute of this nature it would be necessary to have evidence of both the parties with regard to each transaction. This would involve evidence whether a certain transaction was entered into between the parties, as alleged by one or the other side. The rate of the particular share as it varied on the day of the transaction and of what rate was the transaction of sale and purchase entered into. Further, according to the respondent, certain payments were made in cash. This would also require evidence. In other words, the exercise would involve rendition of accounts. There is no dispute that both the parties rely on voluminous material to prove its case. We agree with the District Forum that such an exercise cannot be undertaken in the time bound proceedings under the Consumer Protection Act and therefore, the complainant has been rightly relegated to his remedy before the Civil Court. With regard to the contention of Mr. Alvi that the Fora exercise powers of the Civil Court, it is sufficient to point out that the argument is based on a partial reading of the provision of Section 13(4) of the Consumer Protection Act. The Fora exercises powers of a Civil Court in respect of only matters laid down in the Act in Sub-clauses (i) to (iv). In other words, the Fora does not exercise all the powers of a Civil Court. For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be communicated to the parties as well as District Forum-II. Appeal dismissed. ______________