TMI Blog1994 (6) TMI 136X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y issuing an introductory circular claiming therein that their clients will be advised of their TIPS and if they follow their TIPS, will get the profit within two/three weeks and that all the profits made by the clients will be paid to them on the pay out dates prescribed by Bombay Stock Exchange, that in the event of their incurring losses they will not be liable to pay losses to the respondents or any other person and further in such cases the investors will be entitled to encash their cheque on the 60th day and get back their initial capital. 2. The applicant, in this case Shri K.S. Nagesha, being impressed by the scheme of the respondents had deposited Rs. 10,000 vide demand draft No. 326090, dated 10-5-1991 towards his capital fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 94 before the notary public. 4. In the affidavit the applicant has fairly deposed that after filing the compensation application he had received back his initial deposit of Rs. 10,000 from the respondent. In para 2 of his affidavit he fairly admits that the amount of Rs. 1,200 paid to Sudha Investments was non- refundable in accordance with the terms of agreement. The applicant has urged that since the TIPS provided by the respondents was of no use to the applicant, he claimed the refund of Rs. 1,200 from respondent No. 1. In support of his allegations the applicant has filed certain documents, i.e., introductory circular, Letter of Respondent No. 2. Nectar Consultancy on the subject of Risk Free Dealings in Stock Exchange. In this le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o render the services as promised by them in the impugned circular. 6. After going through the records and the uncontroverted statement made on oath by the applicant, we are satisfied that the respondents have made certain false and misleading representation to allure the unwary public in depositing the amount with them, it is an unfair trade practice squarely covered under section 36A(1)( vi ) of the Act. We also hold that the unfair trade practice in question is prejudicial to the public interest and the interest of the investors. 7. The claim made by the applicant under this application, i.e., Rs. 10,000, has already been paid and the other amount of Rs. 1,200 cannot be compensated being non-refundable in nature. However, the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
