9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (9) TMI 270X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce R.N. Mittal, President - This appeal has been filed by the complainant against the order of the District Forum dated 22-10-1992 by which his claim has been rejected. 2. Briefly the facts are that the complainant purchased a large number of units of the opposite party (O.P.). The O.P. it is alleged, by him, did not send dividend warrant of Rs. 26,250 relating to some units within time. Cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. The complainant has come up in appeal. 4. It is contended by the appellant that the O.P. was bound to send the dividend warrant under registered cover but they failed to do so. Consequently if the dividend warrant was lost they were bound to send another dividend warrant without taking any indemnity bond from him. We have duly considered the argument but do not find any substance in it. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he complainant suffered loss on account of their negligence. In the circumstances we award damages of Rs. 500 to the complainant. For the aforesaid reasons we partly accept the appeal with costs, set aside the order of the District Forum and direct the O.P. to pay an amount of Rs. 500 to the appellant within a period of three months, failing which action shall be taken against them under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
