• No results found

'A STUDY ON RETAIL INVESTORS GRIEVANCES IN INDIAN CAPITAL MARKET'

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2020

Share "'A STUDY ON RETAIL INVESTORS GRIEVANCES IN INDIAN CAPITAL MARKET'"

Copied!
14
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

International Research Journal of Management and Commerce Vol. 4, Issue 3, March 2017 Impact Factor- 5.564 ISSN: (2348-9766)

© Associated Asia Research Foundation (AARF)

Website: www.aarf.asia Email : editor@aarf.asia , editoraarf@gmail.com

'A STUDY ON RETAIL INVESTORS GRIEVANCES

IN INDIAN CAPITAL MARKET'

Dr. (Mrs.) N. V. Kavitha

HOD Commerce Department,

St. Ann’s College for Women, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad-500 028. &

Mrs. N. Suma Reddy

Lecturer-Commerce Department,

St. Ann’s College for Women, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad-500 028.

ABSTRACT

Investor’s grievance Redressal mechanism and safeguarding of retail investors dispense with

one another. Nayak (2010) comprehends the system, have to offer several checks and balances where the entrepreneurial effort is supported by investor’s confidence to easily

capitalize on it, which has failed towards the extent expected and desired. In spite of, diverse

methods and actions taken by Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Ministry of

Corporate Affairs, Ministry of Finance and Stock Exchanges, the retail investors are let

down, dejected and are excluded from the systems. Different Regulations, Bylaws, Acts, are

structured to shield the interest of the retail investors, but the grievances still persist. Various

Frauds like, Harshad Mehta (1991), Ketan Parekh (2001), Satyam (2008), Sahara India

Pariwar investor fund (2010), NSEL (2013), PACL Fonzi scheme (2014) and other

malpractices like insider trading & bucket trading has traumatized the self-reliance of retail

investors. The studies and data illustrate that investors are unhappy and their grievances are

piling.

The present research paper attempts to explore the diverse grievances and Redressal

mechanisms in Indian capital market. A pilot survey is carried out to understand Redressal

mechanisms at SEBI and the various grievances encountered by retail investors. Structured

Questionnaires were executed to 50 investors and data collected is analysed. Despite the

market reforms and regulatory measures initiated by the individuals at the helm of dealings,

(2)

involved in the capital market. To Sustain a healthy and strong Stock market, investor’s

confidence to be enhanced by facilitating assurance with respect to Securitisation of funds.

Keywords: Capital Markets, SEBI, Investors Grievances, Redressal mechanism

INTRODUCTION

Indian capital market, the oldest capital market in the world dates back to 18th century by

commencing the trading of securities of East India Company in Mumbai and Kolkata. Capital

market is a supporting system that provides vitality and sustenance to industrial and

commercial enterprises which gained momentum during the liberalization era. Indian

securities market is regulated by various agencies, such as the Department of Economics

Affairs (DEA), the Department of Company Affairs (DCA), the Reserve Bank of India (RBI)

and SEBI. The Capital Market reforms aimed at improving market efficiency, enhancing

transparency, checking unfair trade practices and bringing the Indian capital market up to the

International Standards.

Indian Capital Market has made commendable progress since the inception of SEBI and has

been transformed into one of the dynamic capital markets of the world. SEBI Launched

online trading, dematerialization of securities, derivatives trading, rolling settlement in the

stock exchanges which resulted in increased transparency in dealings and Rise in market.

Liberalization has opened doors of opportunity in financing the private sectors investments as

Domestic capital market, International capital market and foreign direct investment. Small

investors are the backbone of Indian Capital market who actively participates in channelizing

savings on portfolio investments and recent SEBI reports exhibits 19 million share owning

individuals in India. Domestic savings of investors must be brought to mainstream of Indian

capital market which requires instilling confidence in the minds of investors as there is a

common disinclination on the part of the public to invest either directly or indirectly in

capital market.

Government of India initiated mechanism to redress grievances of the investors through

various Acts like Companies Act, 1956, Securities Contract (Regulation) Act, 1956,

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and SEBI Act, 1992. Indian capital market harmonized with

global market resulting in change of market volatility and investors evidenced with some

market irregularities like economic crisis and corporate scandals made regulators put into

(3)

Developments in Capital Market Reforms

The Indian regulatory and supervisory framework of securities market has been strengthened

through the legislative and administrative measures and consistent with the best international

benchmarks like International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO).

Capital market reforms undertaken to encompass legislative regulatory & institutional

reforms, statutory market regulator to empower and strengthen SEBI

India is one of the few countries

 To start the screen based trading of government securities

 Interest rate futures contracts on the screen based trading platform

 Straight through Processing (STP), automate process of order flow and clearing and

settlement on the stock exchanges

 To introduce Real Time Gross Settlement system (RTGS) which will allow real delivery

v/s. payment an international norm recognized by BIS and IOSCO

 Demutualization and corporatization of stock exchanges mechanism to protect the interest

of investors in securities market

 Uniform rolling settlement and same settlement cycles were prescribed creating a true

spot market.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

 To examine the various types of investors Grievances in Indian Capital market (ICM)

 To evaluate the initiatives of SEBI in Redressal Mechanism

METHODOLOGY

The methodology adopted for the present research study is undertaken by pilot survey

method where structured questionnaires executed to 50 investors and data thus collected is

analyzed to study the investor’s grievances by using SPSS tool. Data also retrieved from

secondary sources-SEBI annual reports, websites, journals, books, etc.,

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The present research paper is confined to evaluate the types of grievances of investors in

Capital market and also to investigate kind of measures taken by SEBI to safeguard the

(4)

LITERATURE REVIEW

An extensive literature survey into various studies revealed-

Chandra (1991), in a study on the proper functioning of the securities markets, examined the

government policy of favoring the small shareholders in terms of allotment of shares. The

study suggested that there was a need to eliminate the bias as that would lead to a better

functioning of the Capital Market and would strengthen investors’ protection.

Pandya (1992), in a study, “SEBI: Its Role, Powers, Functions and Activities”, observed that

as a regulatory and development body, SEBI's efforts in the direction of investor protection

are varied and unlimited. The measures brought in by SEBI broadly cover measures for

allocation efficiency in the primary market with a fair degree of transparency..

Barua and Varma (1993), in a study on the activities of the scams reported that press reports

first appeared in April 1992, indicating that there was a shortfall in Government Securities

held by the State Bank of India (SBI). Investigations revealed that it was just the tip of an

iceberg which came to be called the securities scam. It involved the 21 misappropriation of

funds to the tune of over Rs. 3500 crore (about $ 1.2 billion).

Dhillon (1993), in a doctoral dissertation examined the regulatory policies of the Bombay

Stock Exchange (BSE) over a four year period (July 1986 - June 1990). The findings showed

that regulatory authorities decided changes in their margin policy on the basis of market

activity. It found out that the margins were prompted by changes in settlement returns, price

volatility, trading volume and open positions

Varma (1996), in a study of the weaknesses of the Securities Market, found out that

investors were being treated unfairly. Thus, investors were being misled with impunity.

Using two examples, the study pointed out how easily issuers and merchant bankers got away

with grossly misleading advertisements for public issues. He also stated that, investors must

be protected in all deals, whether they are rights issue, script issue or merger. merchant

bankers. It was argued that, such a ghost must be exorcised, if dealings in the Indian capital

market were to be done at fair and reasonable valuations.

Varma (2002), with a view on Corporate Governance, stated that from the days of Adam

Smith, those who have placed their faith in the free markets had done so in the full

knowledge of the greed that permeated human society. It pointed out that, the breakdown of

27 market discipline may be attributed to State interventions in the free market that fatally

weakened its ability to correct itself.

Dubey (2007), examined the risk management of companies and pointed out that, the

(5)

activities were carefully identified and disclosures made. Such activities as the increased use

of derivatives, which possessed a potentially indomitable and preposterous nature, were

fuelling the systemic risk in the Indian Capital Market.

Gaggav (2007), in a study of risk assessment, pointed out that, risk assessment and

management was fast becoming an area of disclosure in the report of Board of directors, and

therefore the Capital Market should not be an exception. It pointed out that, the era of

demutualization in the Capital Market meant that careful disclosure of risk management 28

activities, put in place by management, minimized the losses that resulted both to the

company and the investors.

Parimala (2008), examined a critical study on regulator frame work towards retail investor's

protection in IPOs which reveals the initiative of the SEBI for protecting investors through

Disclosure and Investors Awareness.

Sabarinathan (2010), views "SEBI's Regulation of the Indian Securities Market: A Critical

Review of the Major Developments", focusing on SEBI's performance and economic

consequences of Indian stock market that could potentially affect the functioning of the

securities market adversely.

Venugopal, Sudarsan and Himachalam (2012), examined "Small Investors' Grievances

and Redressal Mechanism in Indian Capital Market", exploring the various problems faced

by the small investors and SEBI’s mechanisms in redressing the retail investors grievances.

The above reviews fall short of quantifying the risks in the Capital Market. The present paper

makes an attempt in understanding the grievances of retail investors and examines the various

redressal mechanism of SEBI. This should be able to guide investors to invest wisely,

avoiding losses.

RETAIL INVESTORS GRIEVANCES IN INDIAN CAPITAL MARKET

Prelude

SEBI has brought in various Laws, Acts, Rules and Regulations to protect the interest of the

retail investors, but the retail investors still feel disappointed, dejected and often excluded

from the system and their grievances still remain. Scams (Harshad Mehta scam, Ketan Parekh

scam, and Satyam scam) Scandals and Malpractices, unauthorized trading in the accounts of

investors, churning to increase brokerage, induced volatility to make arbitrage opportunities

for larger players at cost of the retail players etc., apart from incurring of heavy losses for

them in securities market has shaken the confidence of retail investors. The retail investors

(6)

unreasonable and chaotic investment decisions of the unplanned investors have resulted in

unspeakable miseries to them and consequences are lack of returns, opportunity loss form

alternative investments causing mental strain of investors and the types of investor’s

grievances are listed below.

S. No Nature of Grievances

1 Delay in transfer of shares

2 Non-receipt of shares/dividends/rights/bonus shares 3 Delay/Non-receipts in issue of duplicate shares 4 Delay/ Non-receipt of annual reports

5 Delay/ Non-receipt of redemption amount of debentures 6 Delay/ Non-receipt of interest on debentures

7 Delay/ Non-credit of shares in the account by the broker 8 Delay/Non-payment of sale proceeds by the broker etc. 9 Manipulation in the accounts statements

10 Unauthorized trades and unauthorized movements of shares and funds from the clients’ accounts

11 Dabba Trading/ churning etc. in clients' accounts 12 Delay/Non-updating of clients' information in records SEBI website: www.http://investor.sebi.gov.in.investorcomplaint.form

The present research study revolves around to examine the diverse types of retail investor

grievances in securities market where the data is retrieved from primary source through a

structured questionnaire from different class of investors so has to have an understanding on

the types of grievances and its Redressal.

Survey Analysis

In order to understand the investor’s grievances a structured questionnaire was executed to a

convenient sample of seventy five respondents of different income groups. Out of which only

fifty six respondents have responded by filling the questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted

five parts namely Personal details, personal finance, primary markets, secondary markets and

[image:6.595.84.516.117.331.2]

investors grievances. Few of the collected data is presented in the following tables-

Table 1: No of Investors under different Income groups

Source: Primary data

Monthly Income (Rs) Yes No Total

10000-20000 6(10.7%) 0(.0%) 6(10.7%)

20000-40000 3(5.4%) 2(3.6%) 5(8.9%)

40000-70000 8(14.3%) 0(.0%) 8(14.3%)

70000-100000 13(23.2%) 2(3.6%) 15(26.8%)

Above100000 22(39.3%) 0(.0%) 22(39.3%)

Total 52(92.9%) 4(7.1%) 56(100.0%)

(7)

Table 1 elicits that more than three fourth i.e. 39.3% of the respondents in the income group

of above rupees one lakh are investors and 23.2%,14.3% and 10.7% of the respondents in the

income group of seventy thousand to one lakh, forty thousand to seventy thousand and ten

thousand to twenty thousand respectively are into investment practice.

The chi-square test value at 5% level of significance indicates that there is no relationship

[image:7.595.49.551.180.423.2]

between the level of monthly income and they being the investors.

Table 2: Income vs. Various forms of investments

Monthly Income

(Rs)

NSC Post

Offices Life Insuran ce Savin gs Bond Mutua l Funds Equit y Share s Deriv-atives Total 10000-20000

0(.0%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 3(5.4 %)

0(.0%) 3(5.4 %)

0(.0%) 6(10.7%)

20000-40000

0(.0%) 0(.0%) 5(8.9%) 0(.0% )

0(.0%) 0(.0% )

0(.0%) 5(8.9%)

40000-70000

0(.0%) 2(3.6% )

3(5.4%) 0(.0% )

3(5.4% )

0(0%) 0(.0%) 8(14.3%)

70000-100000 2(3.6 %) 2(3.6% ) 8(14.3% ) 0(.0% ) 3(5.4% ) 0(.0% )

0(.0%) 15(26.8 %) Above 100000 5(8.9 %) 3(5.4% ) 6(10.7% ) 0(.0% ) 2(3.6% ) 0(.0% ) 6(10.7 %) 22(39.3 %)

Total 7(12.5 %) 7(12.5 %) 22(39.3 %) 3(5.4 %) 8(14.3 %) 3(5.4 %) 6(10.7 %) 56(100.0 %)

Chi-Square test : .000

Source: Primary data

Table 2 clearly indicates the preferences of the respondents and their investment pattern in

different securities. Almost 40% of the respondents prefer to invest in life insurance policies,

14.3% of the total respondents invested in mutual funds, 12.5% each in post offices and

National saving certificates and 10.7% of the respondents in derivatives.

The chi-square test value at 5% level of significance indicates that there is no association

[image:7.595.57.555.608.743.2]

between the level of monthly income of the respondents and their investment preferences.

Table 3: Income vs. Increase in Exemption limit for Investors

Monthly Income

(Rs)

Strongly Agree

Agree Can’t

Say

Disagree Strongly Disagree

Total

10000-20000 3(5.4%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 3(5.4%) 0(.0%) 6(10.7%)

20000-40000 2(3.6%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 3(5.4%) 0(.0%) 5(8.9%)

40000-70000 2(3.6%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 6(10.7%) 0(.0%) 8(14.3%)

70000-100000

(8)

Above100000 16(28.6%) 3(5.4%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 3(5.4%) 22(39.3%)

Total 26(46.4%) 11(19.6%) 4(7.1%) 12(21.4%) 3(5.4%) 56(100.0%)

Chi-Square test :000

Source: Primary data

Table 3 explains the perceptions of the respondents with regards to increase in the tax

exemption limit of the existing 1.5laks.It is evident the more than half of the respondents i.e.

66% of the respondents (46.4% & 19.6%) expressed that they would like to have an increase

in the existing limit. And 21.4% of the respondents also expressed their disagreement with

the same, it is interesting to note that they are all from the monthly income group of below

rupees seventy thousand.

The chi-square test value at 5% level of significance indicates that there is no association

between the level of monthly income of the respondents and their perceptions with respect to

[image:8.595.63.532.344.518.2]

increase in tax exemption limit on investments.

Table 4: Income vs. Awareness of SEBI

Source: Primary data

In the above table 4 it is clear that more than fifty % of the respondents’ i.e57.1% are aware

of the existence of Securities and exchange board of India, as one of the SEBIs function is to

safe guard and be responsive to the needs/interest of the investors. But at the same time

almost half of the respondents (42.9%) of the investors are not aware of the existence of

SEBI.I think it is high time that the authorities should go out to spread the awareness of its

existence and its functions so as to ensure that even small/retail investors can avail the

benefits. The chi-square test value at 5% level of significance indicates that there is no

relationship between the level of monthly income of the respondents and their perceptions

with respect to awareness of the existence of SEBI.

Monthly Income (Rs) Yes No Total

10000-20000 0(.0%) 6(10.7%) 6 (10.7%)

20000-40000 5(8.9%) 0(.0%) 5(8.9%)

40000-70000 5(8.9%) 3(5.4%) 8(14.3%)

70000-100000 3(5.4%) 12(21.4%) 15(26.8%)

Above100000 19(33.9%) 3(5.4%) 22(39.3%)

Total 32(57.1%) 24(42.9%) 56(100.0%)

(9)
[image:9.595.65.535.57.294.2]

Table 5: Income vs. Satisfaction of Investors

Monthly Income (Rs)

Highly Satisfied

Satisfied Can’t Say Dissati sfied Highly Dissatis fied Total

10000-20000 0(0%) 4(7.1%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 2(3.6%) 6(10.7%)

20000-40000 0(.0%) 1(1.8%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 4(7.1%) 5(8.9%)

40000-70000 0(.0%) 5(8.9%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 3(5.4%) 8(14.3%)

70000-100000

5(8.9%) 6(10.7%) 2(3.6%) 0(.0%) 2(3.6%) 15(26.8% )

Above100000 3(5.4%) 14(25.0 %)

0(0%) 2(3.6% )

3(5.4%) 22(39.3% )

Total 8(14.3% 30(53.6

%)

2(3.6%) 2(3.6% )

14(25.0 %)

56(100.0 %)

Source: Primary data

Table 5 explains the level of satisfaction of the investors with the reforms of SEBI in primary

market for safeguarding the interest of retail investors. Around 70% (53.6% are satisfied and

14.3% are highly satisfied) of the total respondents expressed their satisfaction on the

functioning of SEBI and its reforms to safeguard the investors. And 28.6% (25% & 3.6%) of

the respondents are not satisfied with SEBI’s reforms.

The chi-square test value at 5% level of significance indicates that there is an association

between the level of monthly income of the respondents and their level of satisfaction with

[image:9.595.41.571.519.723.2]

the reforms of SEBI.

Table 6: Income vs. Problems of Investors

Monthly Income (Rs)

Delay in receipt of refunds/allotment Application form too cumbersome Shares are not credited in demat account wrong credit of shares Any

other Total

10000-20000 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 6(10.7%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 6(10.7%)

20000-40000 0(.0%) 5(8.9%) 0(.0%) 0().0% 0(.0%) 5(8.9%)

40000-70000 2(3.6%) 3(5.4%) 3(5.4%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 8(14.3%)

70000-100000

3(5.4%) 7(12.5%) 2(3.6%) 3(5.4%) 0(.0%) 15(26.8%)

Above100000 10(17.9%) 9(16.1%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 3(5.4%) 22(39.3%)

Total 15(26.8%) 24(42.9%) 11(19.6%) 3(5.4%) 3(5.4%) 56(100.0%)

(10)

Table 6 indicate that more than 40% i.e. 42.8% of the total respondents expressed that filling

the application form is too cumbersome ,26.8% stated that there is delay in receipt of refunds

and allotment and around 19.6% felt that the amount is not credited on time into demat

account

The chi-square test value at 5% level of significance indicates that there is no relationship

between the level of monthly income of the respondents and their perceptions with respect to

[image:10.595.68.544.211.499.2]

their problems while investing.

Table 7: Income vs. Grey areas Identified by Investors

Monthly Income (Rs)

Delay/No n-credit of Shares in Demat A/C

Non Receipt of Statement of Account

Non Receipt

of Contract

Notes

Excess Levy of Broker

age

Brokers Not Giving

Right Advice

Total

10000-20000 3(5.4%) )

0(.0% 0(.0%) 3(5.4%) 0(.0%) 6(10.7%)

20000-40000 1(1.8%) 1(1.8%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 3(5.4%) 5(8.9%)

40000-70000 3(5.4%) 0(.0

%)

2(3.6%) 3(5.4%) 0(0%) 8(14.3%)

70000-100000

3(5.4%) 4(7.1%) 8(14.3%) 0(0%) 0(.0%) 15(26.8% )

Above100000 2(3.6%) 16(28.6%) 4(7.1%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 22(39.3% )

Total 12(21.4%

)

21(37.5%) 14(25.0 %)

6(10.7% )

3(5.4%) 56(100.0 %)

Source: Primary Data

Table 7 explains the grey areas identified by the investors in secondary market. We have

37.5% of the total respondents expressed non receipt of statement of account, around 25%

stated that they are not receiving contract notes on time and 21.4% of the respondents felt that

there is a delay or noncredit of shares in their account.

The chi-square test value at 5% level of significance indicates that there is no relationship

between the level of monthly income of the respondents and their perceptions with respect to

(11)
[image:11.595.66.545.65.281.2]

Table 8: Income vs. Investors complaints on SEBI

Monthly Income (Rs)

Over regulatio

n of SM

Frequent changes

in policies

delay in resolving

inadequa te efforts

no protectio

n

Any Other

Total

10000-20000 0(.0%) 0(0%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 6(10.7%) 0(.0%) 6(10.7%)

20000-40000 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 0(.0%) 4(7.1%) 0(.0%) 1(1.8%) 5(8.9%)

40000-70000 2(3.6%) 0(0%) 0(.0%) 5(8.9%) 1(1.8%) 0(.0%) 8(14.3%)

70000-100000

3(5.4%) 4(7.1%) 5(8.9%) 0(.0%) 3(5.4%) 0(.0%) 15(26.8%)

Above100000 5(8.9%) 2(3.6%) 7(12.5%) 4(7.1%) 3(5.4%) 1(1.8%) 22(39.3%)

Total 10(17.9%

)

6(10.7%) 12(21.4%

)

13(23.2% )

13(23.2% )

2(3.6%) 56(100.0%

)

Chi-Square test : .000

Table 8 indicates the investors’ complaints on the functioning of SEBI. We find that 23.2%

of the respondents are complaining about inadequate efforts and no protection to investors

from SEBI. 21.4% of the respondents stated that there is delay in resolving their grievances

and 17.9% of the respondents felt that there is over regulations of stock markets

The chi-square test value at 5% level of significance indicates that there is no relationship

between the level of monthly income of the respondents and their perceptions with respect to

the complaints against SEBI.

Initiatives of SEBI in Redressal Mechanism

Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has been setup to protect the interest of

investors in securities and also to promote the development and regulate the securities

market. An investor enjoys investing, if (i) he knows how to invest; (ii) he has full knowledge

of the market; (iii) the market is safe and there are no miscreants; and (iv) there are

arrangements to redress the grievances. Retail investors grievances Redressal mechanism is

not yet satisfactory and much remains to be done by Government, market regulator SEBI and

other market intermediaries. The grievances can be initiated by Retail investors against any of

the following agencies / intermediaries, namely:

 Securities & Exchange Board of India

 Stock Exchanges

 Depositories and Depository Participants

(12)

 Merchant Brokers

 Registrars and Transfer Agents

 Listed Companies

Various Grievances Redressal Mechanism at SEBI

 Investor Service Cell & investor Service Committee / Investor Grievance Cell &

Committee

 Arbitration & Conciliation Mechanism

 Investor Protection Fund

 Listing Agreement Mechanism

 SCORES (SEBI Complaints Redress System)

INITIATIVES

 Building the capacity of investors through education and awareness to enable an investor

to take informed investment decisions.

 Investment details in Indian Capital securities market relevant for investing to be made

available in public domain. SEBI adopted disclosure based regulatory regime and

monitors various initial and continuous disclosures.

 To ensure the Capital market has systems and practices to make transactions safe where

SEBI has taken various measures, such as, dematerialization of securities, screen based

trading system, T+2 rolling settlement, etc.

 A comprehensive mechanism devised by SEBI to facilitate Redressal of investor

grievances against intermediaries and listed companies. by sending reminders,

enforcement actions (adjudication, prosecution proceedings, directions, etc.) as per law

 A comprehensive arbitration mechanism has been inducted in stock exchanges and

depositories for resolution of disputes of the investors with brokers and depository

participants.

 Instituted investor protection funds at Exchanges to compensate investors where a broker

is declared a defaulter.

 The Office of Investor Assistance and Education (OIAE) acts as the single window

(13)

CONCLUSION

Investor grievance Redressal mechanism, one of the imperative actions SEBI has initiated in

Indian Capital Market securities to attain effective Investor Protection is still in vain

regardless the best efforts of SEBI, many grievances are unresolved. In India, Redressal

mechanism is complex due to multiple agencies involved, the Redressal of retail investor

complaints with specific tasks are overlapping causing confusion for retail investors and

intermediaries. Though SEBI has upgraded the investor grievance Redressal mechanism by

implementing SCORES which is centralized grievances tracking system for the entire SEBI

which will reduce grievance process time as the entire process is in electronic mode but still

pending grievance in capital market persists due to No centralized database, Delay in

Redressal, Loss/ misplacement of records and Storage. From the empirical study in the

present research it is observed that 25% of the respondents are not receiving contract notes on

time and 21.4% of the respondents viewed there is a delay or noncredit of shares in their

account and also 21.4% of the respondents expressed that there is delay in resolving their

grievances and 17.9% of the respondents opined there is over regulations of stock markets

Hence, the need of the hour is to implement effective investor grievance mechanism to

achieve 100% grievance Redressal rate, aiming for consistent Redressal system through

investor awareness and education making Indian securities capital market deeper & broader

enhancing the money flow to securities market-Only then Indian capital market will be on par

with other developed markets of the world.

REFERENCES

1. Annual reports of SEBI – www.sebi.gov.in

2. Grievances and Redressal of investors in Indian Capital Market with regard to

Coimbatore city – Mrs. R. Vennila, Ms. Nevedita. V

3. Handbook of statistics on the Indian Securities Market – 2010-2015

4. http://www.bseindia.com

5. http://iepf.gov.in/FAQs-investorGrievances.asp

6. Investigating the nature of investor’s grievances and assessing the role of the grievance

redressal agencies-Keyur Mahesh Nayak

7. ISIRS-Role of SEBI in the Regulation and Investigation of Indian Securities Market. an

(14)

8. Nifty 50 stock of the Nation, Indian Securities Market – A Review National Stock

Exchange of India Limited, Volume-X, 2007

9. Shodhaganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/13

10.Small investor Grievances and Redressal Mechanism in Indian Capital Market. Dr.

P.Venugopal; Dr. K. Sudarshan; Dr. O.Himachalam

11.Stock Market Investor Grievance Redressal System – An Empirical Study – Dr. T.S.

Devaraja Kusuma Hiremat Y.G.

12.Survey of Indian Investors conducted by SOI and NCAER

13.www.http://sebi.gov.in circular No. CIR/OIAE/2/2011, June 3, 2011

14.www.sebi.gov.in/annualreport

Figure

Table 1: No of Investors under different Income groups
Table 2: Income vs. Various forms of investments
Table 4: Income vs. Awareness of SEBI
Table 5: Income vs. Satisfaction of Investors
+3

References

Related documents

It was reported that the variable SNR showed the highest contribution than the other variables ( θ , P n , and G r ) in the GNSS-R input vectors, either when we retrieved

On the other hand, a law firm Web site that is based on eLawyering concepts goes beyond presenting flat legal content and helps clients collaborate with their lawyer and do

Our hypothesis was that male T2D patients with low total T levels have worse profile on the risk mark- ers for vascular disease accordingly in this study; we com- pared the presence

Delaware River and Estuary Dissolved and Particulate Organic Matter Composition and Sources Using Lipid Biomarkers.. O verall, along-estuary changes in OM com position w

New engine parts furnished by Interstate-McBee are warranted to be free from defects in material and workmanship under normal use and service for a period of twenty-four (24)

Commonly studied effects of crowding included patient mortality, transport delays, treatment delays, ambulance diversion, patient elopement, and financial effect.. Commonly

Resolution of Infertility in a Female Undergoing Subluxation Based Chiropractic Care: Case Report & Review of Literature. Surface Electromyography in the Assessment of

However, it was not clear whether the decrease in inflammation and fibrosis was a direct effect of IL- 10 on HSC or an indirect effect via inhibition of Kupffer cell