CHAIRMAN STERLITE INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD Vs. DEEPAK GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that Mr. Deepak Gupta, complainant, purchased 100 fully convertible debentures of Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. , arrayed as opposite party @ Rs.360 /- from the secondary market and lodged the debentures alongwith duly executed transfer deeds etc. with the aforesaid company in two lots of 50 FCDs each on 30.1.1994 and 10.4.1994 for transfer in favour of the complainant and his mother Smt. Shashi Gupta. The complainant, vide his letter dated 18.5.1994 sent two Bank Drafts both dated 18.5.1994 drawn on Syndicate Bank, Bombay for Rs.4,600/- and Rs.4,535/- respectively towards payment of the first call money and second and final call money. The complainant received acknowledgement slips regarding the said drafts. The complainant, however, failed to receive back the FCDs duly transferred in their favour. He, therefore, filed the complaint before District Forum-II for a direction to the OP to return the FCDs duly transferred in their name together with compensation amounting to Rs.61,000/- as detailed in the complaint.

(2.) The company failed to appear inspite of service of notice. M/s. PCS Industries Ltd. , who were the transfer agents of the aforesaid company, filed a reply. On a consideration of the case, the District Forum held that the complainant was entitled to get the certificates duly transferred in their name with the endorsement of fully paid- up and failure on the part of the opposite party to do so amounted to deficiency in service. A direction was, therefore, given to the opposite party to send the FCDs with the said endorsement of full payment within 30 days. With regard to compensation, the material placed on record by the complainant was discussed and it was observed that it could not be said with a fair amount of certainty that complainant would have sold the scrips when the market price rose from 665 to 690 per debenture. In the absence of concrete evidence, a rough and ready method was adopted and the complainant was awarded interest @ 15% p. a. on the sum of Rs.36,000/- invested by him from 1.8.1994 besides costs of the complaint amounting to Rs.2,000/-. The complainant accepted the order but the opposite party felt aggrieved and preferred this appeal.

(3.) None appeared for the appellant when the appeal came up for hearing today. None appeared on the earlier dates as well. At one stage one Mr. H. Trivedi, authorised representative of the appellant had appeared after the appeal had been adjourned on 2 7.1.1997 and he had been apprised of the order i. e. the next date of hearing and furnished copy of the reply filed by the respondent. There after none appeared for the appellant.