TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (6) TMI 138
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....UTI or M.N. Dastur & Co. Registrars during the period from 1-11-1993 to 30-11-1993. 2. That the opposite party No. 1 also notified that investors acquiring master shares from the market and intending redemption should lodge the certificates together with duly executed transfer deeds and redemp- tion form on or before 25-10-1993. 3. It was further notified that those investors who acquired Master- shares after 25-10-1993 shall not be eligible for redemption. 4. The opposite party No. 1 further declared that those who would not opt for redemption would be eligible for dividend at the rate of 18 per Cent bonus in the ratio of 1:3 and Rights on the increased holding after bonus issue would be in the ratio of 1:1 at a premium of Rs. 5. 5. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., it would fetch an earning of about Rs. 31.17 lakhs to the complainant/petitioner . This has been established by the complainant/petitioner in detailed calculation in Annexure 'A' to the petition. 8. Had the complainant/petitioner opted for the alternative course of the UTI to continue with the scheme, he could have availed of dividend, bonus and Rights on account of 17,400 Master shares held by the complainant/petitioner and in that case, the complainant/petitioner would have fetched an earning of Rs. 1,87,340. Trusting the UTI and calculating the benefit on redemption to be much larger than that on continuing with the scheme, the complainant/petitioner opted for redemption. The complainant/petitioner had not until the due date, namely, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wringhee Road, Calcutta, for settlement of the dispute amicably by mutual discus- sion. None of the contentions of the complainant/petitioner was chal- lenged by the opposite parties. The complainant/petitioner contended that any suggestion for settlement at this late stage was clearly a ploy to delay matters. It is pertinent to note that 20-5-1994 was fixed for final arguments and orders. 12. The complainant/petitioner submitted that the opposite party No. 1 has already admitted its fault for its inability to pay the redemption value for 17,400 Master shares in time as per its promise as the opposite party No. 1 has paid compensation on that account and the complainant/ petitioner accepted the said amount under protest, the same being muc....