The Telegraph
Since 1st March, 1999
Email This Page
Time to make amends

No returns

In January 1995, I invested Rs 5,000 in CRB Capital Markets Ltd. The deposit matured in January 1998. I sent the copy of this certificate several times to the company, requesting it to pay back my principal amount along with the interest. But to date it has`not taken any steps. What is my remedy now'

Biswanath Singh, 92 Sukia Road,

No. 10 Basti, P.. Golmuri, Jamshedpur

Company response: No response.

The expert: The non-payment of dues on the maturity of the sum invested is tantamount to a deficiency in service. When a company or a firm invites deposits promising attractive rates of interest and prompt repayment of the principal amount on the expiry of the stipulated period along with an assurance of security for the investment in the shape of the assets of the company or firm, it is in essence an offer by the company to provide to those interested a safe avenue for the investment of their funds.

The consideration for the arrangement enables the company or firm to use the funds deposited with it for the purposes of its business. Such a transaction is clearly one of providing service for a consideration and the depositor is a consumer under the Act and is therefore entitled to file a petition at the consumer court for deficiency in service.

Happy at last

I wish to bring to your notice a matter of cheating and deceiving involving M/s Ramdeo Media Pvt. Ltd, the publisher of Dalal Street Investment Journal and Flash News. I subscribed for five years to their two publications, Dalal Street Investment Journal (bi-monthly) and Flash News, a weekly newsletter, and paid Rs 10,015 by cheque no. 159577 dated April 11, 2005. They offered a Videocon VCD player and a wrist watch as free gifts to the first 750 subscribers. There was a lottery too in which I was supposed to have won a Reliance phone. The VCD player didn’t work, the mobile phone came without a warranty card and I didn’t receive the wrist watch. Could you please let me know if this is a fit case for a consumer forum'

Bholanath Kanodia, 146 Bangur Avenue, Block A, Calcutta-700055

Company response: Bhola Nath Kanodia has been our subscriber since April 2005 under subscription no. 0524342 and as per the subscription scheme he is entitled to a Videocon DVD as an assured gift and it has been received by him. We started the mega subscription scheme called the “Dhoom offer” in January 2005. It was mentioned in the advertisement that the first 200 subscribers who took a five-year combined subscription to Dalal Street Journal and Flash News would be entitled to a designer watch. After 200 people subscribed, we offered a Foce watch as an early bird prize to the first 750 subscribers. Seven hundred and fifty people subscribed by April 5, 2005. We received payment from the complainant on April 11, 2005. Therefore, he is not entitled to the early bird prize.

He is one of the lucky draw winners under our subscription scheme and is entitled to a Reliance mobile as a lucky gift. This has been published in the Dalal Street Journal and was also communicated to him directly. We regret to inform that owing to unavoidable circumstances, the delivery of the lucky draw gift has been delayed. We had despatched this through Blue Dart courier on April 12, under airway bill no. 11197377181 and hope that he has received it by now.

As per our records, we have been regularly sending Flash News copies to him by post and soft copies by e-mail. We had also provided the login and password needed to access Flash News from our website every week because there was a postal delay. Dalal Street Investment Journal copies are delivered by the local courier.

As a special case, we are despatching a gents Foce watch as a complimentary gift from the subscription department.

In view of the clarification, it is obvious that we have satisfied our subscriber. Hoping to be excused for the inconvenience caused and assuring you of our best services.

Namneet Bhojane, Legal officer, Ramdeo Media Pvt. Ltd, Motilal Media Building, 104-A first floor, 22D S.A. Brelvi Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001

The expert: From the company’s reply, it seems that though it was late in keeping its promise, for the sake of its reputation in the market it complied at last with its assurance and sent the lucky draw gift through Blue Dart. The complainant must have received it by this time.

It is indeed a happy occasion that the company resolved the problem of the consumer and has decided to despatch one gent’s Foce watch as a complimentary gift to the complainant from the subscription department. It shows that timely intervention at times pays rich dividends.

Law and order

Along with my family members, I invested Rs 7,100 with Sterling Tree Magnum (India) Ltd, Chennai. According to certificate numbers I-1319 and I-1320 issued to me, the first interim return was payable on August 11, 2001. But to date the company has neither paid the interim return nor refunded the invested amount. In this connection, please note that I exchanged five or six letters with company officials. In their last letter, they pleaded their inability to act as per their assurance. I am a 65-year-old retired person. Please guide me.

Monoranjan Pathak,
3/1A, Banamali Chatterjee Street, Calcutta-700002

Company response: From our records, we observe that you have already rejected the proposed scheme of conversion of Teakquity into Equity.
The company application C.A. 407 & 408/1999 is still pending before Madras High Court. On receipt of appropriate orders from the court, we have to inform it of the feedback being received from the investors in respect of the information memorandum. Madras High Court will take a decision on this matter on a majority basis. Therefore, please appreciate that only after receipt of the final verdict from Madras High Court will we be in a position to proceed further. Kindly bear with us till we inform you about the further developments in court.
Authorised signatory,
Sterling Tree Magnum (India) Ltd,
No. 5, 41st Street,
Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600083.

The expert: From the reply of the company, it appears that as the case is pending before the high court at Chennai, the company is not in a position to accede to the request made by the complainant. Under the circumstances, it would be wise to enquire about the matter at Madras High Court on the basis of the company application C.A. 407 & 408 of 1999.
If it transpires that a restrictive order was passed by the high court the complainant will have to wait till the vacation or cancellation or modification of the order. If not, only under those circumstances the complainant can file an application in the case pending before the high court with a plea to add him as a party therein and pray to the court for proper redress.

Email This Page