Manager Trehan Sons vs D B Kaila

ON a complaint of Shri D.B. Kaila, the District Forum -I ordered on 16.8.1999 that therein was a delay of 3 or 4 months in offering the rectified shares to the complainant and it was ordered that a sum of Rs. 1,500/ - with cost Rs. 500/ - shall be payable. As regards other relief claimed in respect of 200 shares of Ind. Bank Housing, the complainant was advised to approach the Civil Court. Besides this as regards a specific claim of Rs. 12,247/ - which was alleged to be outstanding against M/s. Trehan Sons also the complainant was advised to seek any other appropriate remedy other than that availed with the District Forum. The respondent M/s. Trehan Sons felt aggrieved so far as the relief of Rs. 1,500/ - with cost was concerned and the present appeal has been preferred. The complainant now respondent purchased the following shares from the appellant against payment vide their bills mentioned below against each : Sr. Name of No. of Respondent Amount No. Company shares purchased Bill., dt. (a) Aashi Pharma 500 shares SB -0439 6,250.00 Ltd. dt 2.9.1994 (b) Anant Raj 500 shares SB -0720 5,250.00 Clay Ltd. dt. 14.11.1994 (c) Ind. Bank 200 shares SB -1193 5,362.00 Housing dt. 10.12.1994

Out of the above shares 400 shares of Aashi Pharma Ltd., 200 shares of Anant Raj Clay Ltd., and 100 shares of Ind. Bank Housing were returned by the respective Companies when sent for transfer, as bad delivery due to difference in signatures. These returned shares were handed over to the appellant on the dates mentioned below : Sr. Name of No. of shares Date of receipt No. Company returned by the respondent (a) Ind. Bank 100 shares 3.2.1995 Housing (b) Aashi Pharma 400 shares 28.3.1995 Ltd. (c) Anant Raj 200 shares 13.6.1995 Clay Ltd.

THE respondent has averred that he kept waiting for the shares or the payment of requisite number of shares but all was in vain as a result, he was left with no other option but to approach the Forum. He has prayed that payment of 700 shares already returned to the appellant be made to him alongwith the costs of the shares as mentioned below : (a) Rate Amount (Rs.) (i) Cost of 400 shares of M/s. Aashi Pharma Ltd. 12.50 5,000.00 (ii) Cost transfer stamps 28.00 (iii) Postal expenses 10.00 (b) 10.50 2,100.00 (i) Cost of 200 shares of M/s. Anant Raj Clay Ltd. (ii) Cost of transfer stamps 12.00 (iii) Postal expenses 10.00 (c) Cost of 100 shares of Ind. Bank Housing 27.81 2,781.00 (i) (ii) Cost of transfer stamps 12.00 (iii) Postal expenses 10.00 (iv) Dividend @ 15% paid by the Co. for the year1994 -95 150.00 Total 10,113.50

In the reply, the respondent has raised preliminary objections firstly saying that respondent firm is an unregistered partnership firm and hence it cannot be impleaded until all its partners are impleaded as parties. Secondly the complainant is not a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(d)(I) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and hence he has no locus standi to maintain this complaint. On merits the appellant has averred that the respondent D.B. Kaila placed order for the purchase of shares of other companies and the same were purchased but he had not taken delivery of those shares. The detail of the amount which is recoverable from the complainant -respondent is given below : Date of No. of Name of Rate per Amount Purchase Shares Company Shares 17.11.94 200 Mahendra Suiting Rs. 22.77 Rs.

,554/ - 17.11.94 200 JAIN Spinners Rs. 26.91 Rs.

,382/ - 2.12.94 100 LIBRA Filaments Rs. 15.50 Rs. 1,550/ - (Out of 400 purchased) Total : Rs. 11,486/ - Previous Balance : Rs. 761.50 Total : Rs. 12,247.50 4. During the arguments it is argued by the Counsel of the appellant that it is a matter of routine that shares due take 6 to 7 months delay under such circumstances. It has been further averred that shares mentioned at Serial No. 3, viz. Ind. Bank Housing were not dealt with by the appellant firm. 5. The learned Counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to a typed statement Annexure C -4 which shows that the complainant had been dealing with purchase and sale of shares of 19 different Companies during the period 1.4.1994 to 31.3.1995. There is no evidence to show that these shares were purchased either by the complainant or even any member of his family at a particular time. An important part of the statement of Shri D.B. Kaila aged 78 years recorded in the District Forum on 13.3.1997 the relevant part is reproduced as under : ''...I am carrying on business of purchasing and selling shares from making profit. The statement of accounts attached with the complaint pertains to the transaction mentioned in the complaint. Statement of accounts has been prepared on the basis of record which is in my possession. Shares were returned by the Company on the plea that signatures of the transferor did not tally...'' (Emphasis supplied) This is clear admission by the complainant that he had been purchasing and selling shares for the purpose of business and those clearly beyond the jurisdiction of the District Forum.

AFTER considering all these facts and hearing, it is apparent that the respondent is a kind of Sub Broker. The appeal succeeds and the impugned order of the District Forum is set -aside. Appeal succeeds. -