MANDEEP SINGH Vs. THAPAR AGRO MILLS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the impugned order. District Forum-II dismissed two complaints being Case No.3777/ 95, Mandeep Singh V/s. Thapar Agro Mills Ltd. , and Case No.3780/95, Joginder Kaur Bawa V/s. Thapar Agro Mills Ltd. , on the ground that the facts did not constitute a consumer dispute. The complainants are in appeal.

(2.) The facts in the two cases are identical and it will be sufficient to refer to the facts in the case of Mandeep Singh. Mandeep Singh, complainant, lodged Share Certificate No.102052 for 50 equity shares with the respondent on 28.11.1991 for transfer in his favour. Under Sec.113 of the Companies Act, the shares were required to be transferred within a period of 60 days. However, the shares were received duly transferred only on 31.8.1992. Further grievance of the complainant was that the Company declared dividend @ 12% at the Annual General Meeting of the Company held on 30th December, 1994 and me said dividend was payable within 42 days as required under Sec.207 of the Companies Act. The Company, however, failed to send the dividend which had not been received till the filing of the complaint. It was in these circumstances that the complainant claimed compensation amounting to Rs.44,616/- and dividend alongwith interest @ 24% besides damages for harrassment caused to him. The opposite party M/s. Thapar Agro Mills Ltd. failed to enter appearance inspite of service. It was proceeded ex parte. The District Forum observed that ordinarily the complainants averments having not been controverted, he was entitled to receive compensation besides dividend, but in view of the law laid down by the National Commission, the facts did not disclose a consumer dispute and accordingly dismissed both the complaints.

(3.) We have heard Mr. B. S. Bawa, authorised Agent for the appellant, Mr. Bawa stated that appellants had received the share certificates duly transferred in their name on 31.8.1992 but they failed to receive the dividend. He further stated that at the initial stage, appearance was entered on behalf of the opposite party but later on, the opposite party was not represented.