KOTAK SECURITIES LTD. Vs. C.K. PRADEEP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Sec. 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (the 'Act') against impugned order dtd. 30/11/2016, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram Kerala ('State Commission') in First Appeal No. 778 of 2011 wherein the State Commission allowed the Appeal in part and remanded the matter to the District Forum to decide the question of loss sustained by the Complainant and the compensation against the order dtd. 30/9/2011, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur ('District Forum') in Consumer Complaint No.150 of 2009, wherein the Complaint filed by the Complainant was allowed.

(2.) As per office report, there is a delay of 20 days in filing the present Revision Petition. For the reasons stated in IA/6694/2017, the delay is condoned.

(3.) Brief facts of the case, as per the Complainant, are that he is an NRI who returned to India after giving up his job abroad. Attracted by the advertisements made by the Opposite Parties (OPs), he invested Rs.10,00,750.00 with OP-2 for trading in shares in September 2007. The two executives deputed by OP-2 promised that they will trade in the account of Complainant only after getting confirmation for each transaction. But the OPs traded through his account even without informing him. OP-2 has done derivative trade in his Demat Account without getting any confirmation even though the OPs were aware that for derivative trading the Complainant has to pay margin money and the OPs has to open a separate bank account in the name of the Complainant and the account has to be settled through the bank. On 15/11/2007, the staff of OP-2 contacted him for doing trade and the Complainant refused to give approval. He requested OP-2 to send the ledger showing the trade done from his Account. They did not forward the same. Later, he was informed that he suffered heavy loss as a result of the trade done by OP-2. In spite of the losses OP-2 took brokerage of Rs.1.7 Lakhs. The Complainant suffered loss of 40% of the investment i.e. Rs.5,67,375.00 due to the acts of OP-2 in doing trade without confirmation. The OPs have done derivative trade in the Account of the Complainant without the written authority and without any kind of instruction from him. He did not give any margin money for doing the derivative trade in his account. The OPs did not issue any contract note to him for derivative trade in his Account. The act of OPs amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. The OP-3 is refusing to provide statements of account for the transactions done in his account. He claimed Rs.5,67,375.00 as loss sustained by him and a compensation of Rs.10,000.00.