TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 316X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... One Mr. Sudhir Nagpal delivered Share Certificate No. 39103, Folio No. ITL 015734, of the quantity of 100 shares of Infosys Technology Limited to the Complainant on 25-6-1998. The said Shares Certificate was delivered to the National Stock Exchange of India Limited (for short, "NSE") by Delivery Slip dated 30-6-1998 vide Delivery No. 19337. The Complainant credited the proceeds of the sale of Rs. 1,92,835 in the Settlement Bill No. CC/98/24/56 dated 23-6-1998 and the net amount of that Settlement Bill of Rs. 81,168.25 was debited to the running account of the said Sudhir Nagpal. The abovesaid shares which were delivered to NSE were returned as bad delivery due to difference in the signature. Thereafter, the Complainant re-delivered the ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the loss at Rs. 6,05,580. A copy of the said Report is marked as Exhibit R-2 . The OP having not satisfied with the Report of the said Surveyor appointed another Surveyor by name M/s. Parimal R. Shah to investigate the matter and submit a report. The said second Surveyor investigated the matter and found that the Complainant is not entitled for any compensation. A copy of the said Report is marked as Exhibit R-7 . On the basis of the said Report, the OP repudiated the claim stating that the Complainant is not the introducing member, since the shares were sold through M/s. Innova Securities Investment Limited. A copy of the said letter of repudiation is produced as Annexure R-8 . Challenging the said repudiation, the Complainant has fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mplaint ? (1)Whether the Complaint is liable to be dismissed for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties ? (2)Whether the Complainant proves that it is entitled for compensation from the OP as claimed in the Complaint ? 8. Point No. 1 - The facts in this case are; that one Mr. Sudhir Nagpal transferred the shares to the Complainant, which is a Stock Broker, and received the consideration of Rs. 1,92,835. Thereafter, the shares were returned as bad delivery, since there was a difference in the signature of the transferor. One Mr. Shaji claims to be the real owner of the shares. Ultimately, the shares were sold by M/s. Innova Securities Investment Limited and they were returned again as there was a difference in the signa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Securities Investment Limited also credited the amount to the account of the Complainant consequent on the transfer of the shares to M/s. Innova Securities Investment Limited. Under these circumstances, it is not possible to come to the definite conclusion regarding the loss said to have been suffered by the Complainant. Further, in the absence of the aforesaid persons as parties to this proceedings, no relief could be granted in favour of the Complainant. 11. No doubt the risk of dealing with the stolen shares is covered under the Policy. But in order to establish that the shares which are the subject-matter of this Complaint are the stolen shares, the Complainant is required to adduce evidence by impleading both Mr. Sudhir Nagpa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
