9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 797X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, briefly stated are that the appellant Mrs. Manju Bansal had filed a complaint under section 12 of the Act before the District Forum averring therein that she was the holder of 1,650 units of Master Shares under Folio No. MF 503181. It was stated in the complaint, filed by the appellant that the appellant had not been paid any dividend and bonus shares for Master Shares, due on 30-6-1993. It was further stated that the appellant had addressed a registered letter dated 23-4-1994 to respondent No. 2 ( M/s. M.N. Dastur and Co. Ltd. ), the authorised Registrar and Transfer Agents of respondent No. 1 (Unit Trust of India) for the above said Scheme. It was also stated that in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se No. 674-B, Aggar Nagar, Ludhiana and another 300 shares were received for transfer from one Shri Ashish Bansal of the same address, which were transferred in the names of said Shri Kishore Gopal Bansal and Shri Ashish Bansal as per their requests. 50 shares out of 1,650 shares had been transferred in the name of one Shri Satpal Mehra, resident of 56, Subzi Mandi, Amritsar. It was stated by the respondents in their reply that all the above facts were duly brought to the notice of the appellant. It was also stated in the reply that the appellant had renounced her right in respect of 1,400 Right Shares in favour of said Shri Ashish Bansal. 4. The learned District Forum vide impugned order has held that disputed questions of fact canno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issues involved are simple such as the defective quality of any goods purchased, or any shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance of a service which the respondent has contracted to perform for consideration. Even in such cases, if it appears to the concerned Forum that the issues raised cannot be determined without taking elaborate, oral and documentary evidence, it is open to such redressal agency, established under the Act, to decline to exercise jurisdiction and refer the party to his ordinary remedy by way of suit. In our above views, we stand fortified by two decisions of the Hon ble National Commission in cases Special Machines v. Punjab National Bank I [1991] CPJ 78 (NC); and B.K. Seth, Managing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
