1998 (2) TMI 457

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... thheld the entire records and that a suit had been filed on the original side of Delhi High Court and interim directions were being obtained to process the case of transfer of shares. 500 shares out of those sent by the complainant were transferred and sent to the complainant in October, 1995. The remaining shares were returned as being fictitious. The opposite party denied that the complainant was covered under the definition of 'consumer' under the Act. It was further pleaded that the company had a dispute with its Registrar and in the absence of the records which were withheld by the Registrars necessary action for transfer of the shares could not be taken. The District Forum held that the complainant was covered under the definition of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the papers to the senior officials, who became aware of the order on 25-2-1997. He obtained decision of the Director, who was out of station on tour and returned to Delhi only on 2-3-1997. The Director discussed the matter with the Advocate and decided to file an appeal on 14-3-1997. The Advocate was asked to prepare application for condonation of delay and this is the explanation rendered for not filing the appeal in time. The affidavit of the Director of the company in the nature of verifying the facts stated in the application generally has been filed. The delay required to be condoned is of 39 days. We find that the grounds disclosed in the application do not make out sufficient cause for condona-tion of delay. The period of 30 days fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tain number of shares from the secondary market. In law, he had acquired right and title to the shares and being beneficiary was entitled to request the company to transfer the shares in his name on the basis of the transfer deeds duly executed by the holder of the shares. Unless the right of the transferee to have the share transferred in his or her name is taken to inhere in the case of a transfer the shares would cease to be tradable. The case of the respondent was, therefore, clearly distinguish-able, and he was covered under the definition of 'consumer'. 4. With regard to the other ground, namely that the company was prevented from transferring the shares earlier than it did because of dispute with its Registrars, does not furnish .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X