AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
MR. Justice S.N. Phukan, President- This is a petition under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by two persons, namely, Sri Pawan Kumar Sharma and his wife Smt. Saroj Sharma. The Respondent No.1, namely, M/s. Nagarjuna Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. brought out a public issue of equity shares and also invited applications the public. Both the petitioners applied and each of them were allotted 1,000 equity shares each. The details of Number of share certificates etc. have been stated in the petition. Certificates were received by both the petitioners asking for payment of money for allotment, first call, second and final call and last dates for payment were 15.5.91,1.7.91 and 31.8.91 respectively. Misalleged that, the Respondents while asking for payment of first and second call money promised to pay interest for early payment and accordingly petitioners paid the amount in advance in anticipation of interest. The details of such payments have been stated in Para 5 of the petition. The allotment money was paid by Demand Draft dated 24.5.91. First call, second and final call were also paid by Cheque dated 17.5.91. According to the petitioners the Cheques were encashed on 18.5.91. The petitioners sent also the Share Certificates for necessary endorsement by Registered Letter dated 28.5.91 and the Respondents also by letters dated 12th and 14th June, 91 acknowledged receipts of the Share Certificates and informed the petitioners that after getting confirmation from Bank regarding payment the certificates would be sent back with proper endorsement. The grievance of the petitioners is that, inspite of repeated reminders, share certificates with necessary endorsement were not sent on time and ultimately these certificates were sent to petitioner No. 1 on 13.6.92 and to petitioner No. 2 on 11.6.92 and those were received by them on 17.7.92 and 15.7.92 respectively. Petitioners have alleged that there was delay in sending the share certificates due to negligence of the Respondents and therefore they could not sell their shares in the market though the value went up to Rs. 64/- per share on 2.4.92 in Gauhati Stock Exchange, but subsequently the value went down to Rs. 24/-, 25/- per share. Therefore, the present petition has been filed claiming compensation of Rs. 1,21,660/-with interest at the rate of 24% per annum.
THOUGH notices were sent, no appearence was caused on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The Respondent No. 3 is a Bank having branch at Guwahati and the said Bank has appeared and stated that as in the present petition there is no allegation of deficiency of services and therefore Bank reserved its right to file additional written statement, if necessary. Heard Mr. S.S. Sarma, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B.R. Dey, learned Counsel for the Respondents-Bank.
Only question to be decided is whether there was deficiency in sending the certificates on the part of the Respondent Nos.l and 2 with proper endorsement, even though, the amount was paid on time by the petitioners. It may, however, be stated that during pendency of this petition, both the petitioner received the Cheques of Rs. 256.63P each as interest as assured by the Respondents and these cheques were received under protest.
IT is true that the petitioners sent their certificates by Registered Post on 28.5.91 but those were sent to them in the middle of July, 1992. From the statements made in Para-9 of the petition, it appears that it took more than one months to receive the certificates by post. Similarly though the petitioners sent certificates by Registered Post on 28.5.91 it can be presumed that those were received by the Respondents only after a month. There was some delay in returning the share certificates by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, as such a delay is bound to occur, inasmuch as, the Respondents had to deal with huge number of share certificates while inviting applications for equity participation in the Company. Therefore, it cannot be said that there was any negligence or deficiency in sending the certificates on the part of the Respondents with proper endorsement.
THE petitioners grievance as stated above is that on 2.4.92, value of shares of the Company in question went upto Rs. 64/- per share, but subsequently it came down to Rs. 24/-, 25/- per share. Share market is a speculaties market and there is bound for fluctuation of value of shares of the Company depending on market condition. Even if, the petitioners would have sold the shares when the value come down to Rs. 24/-, 25/- they would have been able to make a profit of more than double of their investment while purchasing their shares. Merely because the value went up to Rs. 64/- per share, the petitioners are not entitled to get compensation at the above rate, as such damage as claimed by the petitioners is too remote. For the reasons stated above we do not find any merit in the present petition and accordingly it is dismissed. Complaint dismissed.