chapter 8 summary and findingsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/31697/16/16...the fifth...

“A Study on Investors General and Legal Awareness For Online Trading in Gujarat State.”

236

CHAPTER – 8

SUMMARY AND FINDINGS

SUMMARY:

The first chapter deals with the Overview of Stock Market. It includes the

financial markets, classification of financial market, concept of stock market,

history of stock market, first stock exchange who is a House Ter Beurze in

Bruges, Belgium, role of stock exchange considering the point of Raising capital

for businesses, Mobilizing savings for investment, Facilitating company growth,

Redistribution of wealth, Corporate governance, Creating investment

opportunities for small investors, Government capital-raising for development

projects, Barometer of the economy. Regulatory framework also includes Capital

issues act 1947, Securities contracts regulation act 1956, Companies act 1956,

SEBI Act1992, Depositories act and 1996. In this chapter, stock exchange in India

and development of stock market are also considered.

The second chapter deals with the Investors General Awareness about Online

Trading. It covers introduction of online trading, features, facilities, role of

depositories, online trading in BSE and NSE, system and sub system of online

trading, types of online trading which is alternative trading system and order

routing system, internet and securities of online trading, technology, some

benefits which is, easy to efficient, various information, additional power,

physical location, control to individuals, cost per trade is less, variety of products,

trading in global market etc. some limitations also consider in this chapter. Other

important points that are some care should be taken by online trading investors

and why investors prefer online trading are also consider in this chapter.

The third chapter deals with the Investors Legal awareness about online trading. It

covers various acts like Indian Contract Act, 1872, Securities Contracts

(Regulation) Act, 1956, Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957, Securities

mhtml:file://H:/online%20trading%20articals/H/Stock%20exchange%20-%20Wikipedia,%20the%20free%20encyclopedia%20-%203.mht!/wiki/Bruges

mhtml:file://H:/online%20trading%20articals/H/Stock%20exchange%20-%20Wikipedia,%20the%20free%20encyclopedia%20-%203.mht!/wiki/Belgium


237

and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, SEBI (Stock Brokers & Sub-Brokers)

Rules, 1992, SEBI (Stock Brokers & Sub-Brokers) Regulations, 1992, SEBI

(Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992, SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent And Unfair

Trade Practices Relating to, Securities Markets Regulations, 1995, The

Depositories Act, 1996, The Companies Act, 1956.

The forth chapter deals with Research Methodology of the research work. It

covers title of the study, objectives of the study, null hypothesis and alternative

hypothesis, scope of the study, nature of the study, sampling design, data

collection, data analysis, chapter plan, significance of the research, and limitations

of the research.

The fifth chapter deals with the Literature Review and Sample Profile. It covers

the deep study of literatures available. In the sample profile, sex, education, age,

occupation and income are consider in these chapter.

The sixth chapter deals with the Analysis of Investors general awareness about

online trading. It covers various aspects like two most preferred websites, types of

online trading that is intraday and investment, use of online trading, factors

choose that is better earning, safe investment, high growth, easy to access,

liquidity and speculation, rating of various firm according to respondents

preferences, amount that is invest for online transactions by the online trading

investors, some problems faced by the investors during online trading transactions

and investors general knowledge for online trading.

The seventh chapter deals with the analysis of Investors legal awareness about

online trading. It covers the knowledge level about various acts, awareness level

about online trader’s rights, responsibilities and grievances for which SEBI can be

approached.

The eighth chapter deals with the Summary and Findings of the research work.


238

FINDINGS:

SAMPLE PROFILE:

The researcher can successfully collected data from 344 respondents out of 400.

In state level 26 to 35 years age group has highest no of online traders (38%),

closely followed by above 45 years (24%), 36 to 45 years (21%) and below 45

years (17%).Overall all 4 cities have different patterns of investment in respect to

age. It can be said that in the sample, the investment is more after 26 years

onwards.

At state level 76% respondents are male and 21% respondents are female. Overall

online trading in Gujarat indicates a dominance of males. This is expected too. As

males predominate earning members and females have generally less resources

than males for online trading.

Overall state wise investors indicate a higher percentage of graduates followed by

HSC, post graduates, any other with 47%, 23%, 22%, and 8% respectively.

Overall state wise 35% respondents are businessmen, 26% are others, 20% are

professionals, 12% have Government job and the rest 7% respondents falls under

the category of retired.

Overall state wise 20%, 36%, 23% and 21%, respondents’ annual income is

below Rs. 10,000, Rs. 10,000 to Rs.20000, Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 30000 and above Rs.

30000 respectively.

Overall state wise, 8% of the respondents have Demat and Trading Account in

Reliance Money, 6% have in India info line, 13% have in Angel broking,

4%Geogit Securities, 9% have in ICICI Direct, 12% have in HDFC Securities,

4% have in India Bulls, 8% have in Karvy, 9% have in ICICI-securities, 7% have

in Share khan, 3% have in city online, 3%have in Kotak-securities, 5%have in

Marwadi, 4% have in SBI-Investment and 7% have in others.


239

INVESTSORS GENERAL AWARENESS ABOUT ONLINE TRADING:

Overall state wise 53%of the respondents prefer intraday than 47% investment

type of online trading. It can be said that online traders prefer intraday than

investment type of online trading.

Overall 15% of the respondents are involved for less than 6 months, 28% of the

respondents are involved for 6 months to 1 year, 13% of the respondents are

involved for 1 year to 1.5 year, 19% of the respondents are involved for 1.5 year

to 2 years and 26% of the respondents are involved for more than 2 years.

Overall statewise, 15% respondents prefer NSE, 6% BSE, 4% HDFC-securities,

5%, ICICI-direct, 7% Angel broking, 5% Reliance-money, 3% India bulls, 4%

India infoline,3% Marwadi, 3% geojit-securities, 6% share khan, 2% J M

Finance, 1% money control, 1% Buzzing-stock, 2% ICICI Securities, 1% Jhaveri

securities, 3% Karvy, 2% TATA E-trading, 1% rediffmail,1% facebook, 2%

online-trading, 2% city online, 2% E-Broking, 2% ANSPL, 1% khandwala, 2%

motilal-Oswal, 1% ANAM, 3% SBI, 3% Kotak securities, 1% 5paisa.com , 1%

RNSB, 2% Vadodara stock exchange and 2% others. As per the research aspect

BSE India.com and NSE India.com both websites are most preferred to

respondents but Buzzing-Stock.com, Jhaveri-Securities.com, Redifmail.com,

Facebook.com, Khandwala.com,, ANAM.com, 5-Paisa.com, RNSB.com these

websites are not most preferred for the respondents.

Overall respondents gave the 1st rank to time saving criteria, the 2nd rank to more

convenience, 3rd rank to low cost, , the 4th rank to no dependency to others, the

5th rank to real time price awareness,6th rank to more safe and 7th rank to others.

Overall respondents gave the 1st rank to safe investment, the 2nd rank to easy to

access, 3rd to better earning, 4th to liquidity, and 5th to high growth and 6th to

speculation.

Overall state wise, 10% respondents prefer ICICI Securities, 8% prefer share

khan, 3% prefer city online, 9% prefer reliance money, 15% prefer angel broking,

6% prefer Geogit security, 7% prefer India info line, 10% prefer HDFC


240

Securities, 5% prefer ICICI direct. Com, 4% prefer Karvy, 3% prefer kotak

securities, 3% prefer India bulls, 5% prefer Marwadi, 4% SBI investment and 7%

others. The preferences of respondents regarding the various firm, the respondents

gave 1st rank to share khan, the 2nd rank to Indian info line, 3rd rank to angel

broking, the 4th rank is given to reliance money, the 5th rank to ICICI Securities,

the 6th rank to city online, the 7th rank to Geogit securities, the 8th rank to HDFC

securities and the 9th rank to others.

Overall state wise, 21% of the respondents get the information from personal

contacts, 8% from news from chambers of commerce, industry associations, etc.,

10% from legal advisor, 12% from online portal, 11% from newsletters, 19%

websites and brokerage firms, 15% Newspapers, magazines and journals and 4%

form others.

Overall state wise variety of products criteria, for 18% respondents it is most

important, for 38% it is important, for 2% it is neutral, for 13% it is least

important and for 9% it is not important.

Overall state wise time to opent an account criteria, for 19% respondents it is

most important, for 40% it is important, for 2% it is neutral, for 13% it is least


Overall state wise Brokerage charges criteria, for 37% respondents it is most



Overall state wise Customer services criteria, for 42% respondents it is most

important, for 34% it is important, for 2% it is neutral, for 6% it is least important

and for 3% it is not important.

Overall state wise Software criteria, for 27% respondents it is most important, for

40% it is important, for 2% it is neutral, for 10% it is least important and for 5% it

is not important.


241

Overall state wise Research report criteria, for 22% respondents it is most




























242






















Overall state wise, for the statement online trading has captured more investors,

34% respondents are strongly agree, 52% respondents are agree, 6% respondents

are neither agree nor disagree, 4% respondents are disagree and 4% respondents

are strongly disagree. By taking average of the all scales it can be said that

awareness regarding the statement Online Trading has captured more investors is

1.91 which is nearer to ‘agree’.




243










3.11 which is nearer to ‘neither agree nor disagree’.















are neither agree nor disagree, 13% respondents are disagree and 15%

respondents are strongly disagree. By taking average of the all scales it can be

said that awareness regarding the statement Online Trading has captured more

investors is 2.81 which is nearer to ‘neither agree nor disagree’.




244

are neither agree nor disagree, 16% respondents are disagree and 12%

respondents are strongly disagree. By taking average of the all scales it can be

said that awareness regarding the statement Online Trading has captured more

investors is 2.63 which is nearer to ‘neither agree nor disagree’.

Respondent’s perception towards various statements related to online trading is

2.0689, which is nearer to ‘know something’. Overall the respondents’ perception

level falls near to ‘know something.’

There is significant relationship between age of the respondents and perception

about knowledge related to online trading level of the respondents of Gujarat

State. The calculated value of F is 1.48, which is higher than its table value of F,

3.24 at 5% level of significance. Hence null hypothesis is accepted.

For Technological aspects of Online Trading statement, 23% respondents are do

not know, 22% respondents are know a little, 26% respondents are know

something, 24% respondents are know well and 6% respondents are know very

well. By average of all scale, it is clear that agreement level regarding this

statement is 2.69, which is in the category of neither agree nor disagree.

For risk of system failure statement , 10% respondents are do not know, 22%

respondents are know a little, 37% respondents are know something, 23%

respondents are know well and 7% respondents are know very well. By average

of all scale, it is clear that agreement level regarding this statement is 2.94, which

is in the category of neither agree nor disagree.

For professional management statement, 11% respondents are do not know, 19%





For Transaction cost of online Trading statement, 5% respondents are do not

know, 15% respondents are know a little, 31% respondents are know something,

31% respondents are know well and 18% respondents are know very well. By


245

average of all scale, it is clear that agreement level regarding this statement is

3.42, which is in the category of neither agree nor disagree.

For Requisite Information for online Trading statement, 8% respondents are do

not know, 19% respondents are know a little, 32% respondents are know

something, 30% respondents are know well and 12% respondents are know very

well. By average of all scale, it is clear that agreement level regarding this

statement is 3.19, which is in the category of neither agree nor disagree.

For Possibilities of frauds statement, 12% respondents are do not know, 18%





For poor communication network statement, 9% respondents are do not know,

26% respondents are know a little, 31% respondents are know something, 19%




For Level of Transparency statement, 9% respondents are do not know, 21%





For Immediate Resolution when problem occurs at time of Online Trading

statement, 13% respondents are do not know, 22% respondents are know a little,

28% respondents are know something, 20% respondents are know well and 18%

respondents are know very well. By average of all scale, it is clear that agreement

level regarding this statement is 3.08, which is in the category of neither agree nor

disagree.

Here by taking average of all the scales it can be said that respondent’s level

regarding the awareness about the problems faced by online trader legal


246

awareness regarding different laws related to online trading is 3.0507, which is

equal to ‘know something’. Overall the respondents have some idea about the

knowledge level regarding the same.

For I know the procedure for online trading statement, 23% respondents are

strongly agree, 55% respondents are agree, 7% respondents are neither agree nor

disagree, 3% respondents are disagree and 6% respondents are strongly disagree.

By average of all scale, it is clear that agreement level regarding this statement is

2.02, which is in the category of agree.
























247














Here by taking average of all the scales it can be said that respondent’s general

awareness for online trading. General awareness regarding online trading is

1.8750, which is nearer to ‘agree’. Overall the respondents have some idea of

online trading regarding general awareness.

The calculated value of F is 3.03, which is lower than its table value of F, 3.24 at

5% level of significance. There is significant relationship between age of the

respondents and awareness about knowledge related to online trading level of the

respondents. Hence null hypothesis is accepted.

INVESTSORS LEGAL AWARENESS ABOUT ONLINE TRADING:

Overall state wise, for the Indian Contract Act, 1872, 38% of the respondents do

not know, 29% of the respondents know a little, 13% respondents know

something, 15% of the respondents know well and 5% of the respondents know

very well. By taking average of the all scales it can be said that awareness

regarding this type of Act is 2.19, which is more than ‘know a little’.

Overall state wise, for the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, 32% of the

respondents do not know, 25% of the respondents know a little, 25% respondents


248

know something, 10% of the respondents know well and 8% of the respondents

know very well. By taking average of the all scales it can be said that awareness


Overall state wise, for the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957, 35% of

the respondents do not know, 27% of the respondents know a little, 21%

respondents know something, 10% of the respondents know well and 6% of the

respondents know very well. By taking average of the all scales it can be said that

awareness regarding this type of Act is 2.26, which is more than ‘know a little’.

Overall state wise, for the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, 27%

of the respondents do not know, 28% of the respondents know a little, 23%




Overall state wise, for SEBI (Stock Brokers & Sub-Brokers) Rules, 1992, 29% of

the respondents do not know, 26% of the respondents know a little, 26%




Overall state wise, for the SEBI (Stock Brokers & Sub-Brokers) Regulations,

1992, 26% of the respondents do not know, 31% of the respondents know a little,

23% respondents know something, 13% of the respondents know well and 7% of

the respondents know very well. By taking average of the all scales it can be said

that awareness regarding this type of Act is 2.42, which is more than ‘know a

little’.

Overall state wise, for the SEBI (Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992, 27% of the






249

Overall state wise, for the SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent And Unfair Trade

Practices Relating to, 1872, 31% of the respondents do not know, 29% of the

respondents know a little, 22% respondents know something, 11% of the

respondents know well and 7% of the respondents know very well. By taking

average of the all scales it can be said that awareness regarding this type of Act is

2.33, which is more than ‘know a little’.

Overall state wise, for the Securities Markets Regulations, 1995, 34% of the





Overall state wise, for The Depositories Act, 1996, 33% of the respondents do not

know, 29% of the respondents know a little, 22% respondents know something,

8% of the respondents know well and 6% of the respondents know very well. By

taking average of the all scales it can be said that awareness regarding this type of

Act is 2.29, which is more than ‘know a little’.

Overall state wise, for The Companies Act, 1956, 27% of the respondents do not


13% of the respondents know well and 11% of the respondents know very well.

By taking average of the all scales it can be said that awareness regarding this

type of Act is 2.56, which is in between ‘know a little’ and ‘know something.

Respondent’s legal awareness regarding different laws related to online trading is

2.3662, which is nearer to ‘know something’. Overall the respondents have a little

idea about different laws related to online trading.

The calculated value of F is 6.55, which is higher than its table value of F, 3.24 at

5% level of significance. There is no significant relationship between education

level and knowledge level for the laws related to online trading of the respondents

of Gujarat State. Hence null hypothesis is rejected.


250

Overall state wise, for the right to receive the share certificates, on allotment or

transfer (if opted for transaction in physical mode) as the case may be, in due time

18% of the respondents do not know, 29% of the respondents know a little, 13%




Overall state wise, for the right To receive copies of the Annual Report containing

the Balance Sheet, the Profit & Loss account and the Auditor’s Report ,9% of the





Overall state wise, for the right To participate and vote in general meetings either

personally or through proxy,17% of the respondents do not know, 30% of the




2.9, which is nearer to ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the right To receive dividends in due time once approved in

general meetings,9% of the respondents do not know, 24% of the respondents

know a little, 34% respondents know something, 24% of the respondents know

well and 10% of the respondents know very well. By taking average of the all

scales it can be said that awareness regarding this type of Act is 3.01, which is

more than ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the right To receive corporate benefits like rights, bonus,

etc. once approved,25% of the respondents do not know, 24% of the respondents






251

Overall state wise, for the right To apply to Company Law Board (CLB) to call or

direct the Annual General Meeting,23% of the respondents do not know, 22% of

the respondents know a little, 30% respondents know something, 18% of the



2.67, which is in between ‘know a little’ and ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the right To proceed against the company by way of civil or

criminal proceedings,21% of the respondents do not know, 28% of the




2.6, which is between ‘know a little’ and ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the right To proceed against the company by way of civil or

criminal proceedings,20% of the respondents do not know, 29% of the




2.19, which is more than ‘know a little’.

Overall state wise, for the right To apply for the winding up of the company ,34%





Overall state wise, for the right To receive the residual proceeds,17% of the





Overall state wise, for the right To receive offer to subscribe to rights shares in

case of further issues of shares ,13% of the respondents do not know, 22% of the


252




2.99, which is exactly ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the right To receive offer under takeover or buyback offer

under SEBI Regulations ,15% of the respondents do not know, 30% of the




2.81, which is nearer to ‘know something’.

that respondent’s legal awareness regarding rights related to online trading is

2.3662, which is in between ‘know a little’ and ‘know something’. Overall the

respondents have a little idea about different laws related to online trading.

There is no significant relationship between education level and knowledge level

for the inventors rights related to online trading of the respondents of Gujarat


3.24 at 5% level of significance. Hence null hypothesis is rejected.

Overall state wise, for the investor’s responsibility regarding investors have to be

specific, 10% of the respondents do not know, 19% of the respondents know a

little, 21% respondents know something, 34% of the respondents know well and

16% of the respondents know very well. By taking average of the all scales it can

be said that awareness regarding this type of Act is 3.28, which is more than

‘know something.’

Overall state wise, for the investor’s responsibility regarding Investors have to

remain informed, 3% of the respondents do not know, 15% of the respondents




253



Overall state wise, for the investor’s responsibility regarding Investors have to be

vigilant, 7% of the respondents do not know, 12% of the respondents know a



be said that awareness regarding this type of Act is 3.51, which is more than

‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the investor’s responsibility regarding Terms and

conditions you accept while doing online trading, 6% of the respondents do not




type of Act is 3.41, which is more than ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the investor’s responsibility regarding Regulatory

guidelines applicable to investor for online trading, 7% of the respondents do not




type of Act is 3.3, which is more than ‘know something’.

Respondent’s legal awareness regarding responsibilities related to online trading

is 3.3819, which is in between ‘know something’ and ‘know well’. Overall the

respondents have a little idea about investors responsibilities related to online

trading.

There is no significant relationship between education level and knowledge level

for the responsibilities related to online trading of the respondents of Gujarat


3.24 at 5% level of significance. Hence null hypothesis is rejected.


254

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to refund order/allotment advice, 12%




awareness regarding this type of grievance is 2.98, which is nearer to ‘know

something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to non receipt of dividend, 25% of the

respondents do not know, 69% of the respondents know a little, 130%



awareness regarding this type of grievance is 3.01, which is more than ‘know

something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to non receipt of share certificate after

transfer, 34% of the respondents do not know, 50% of the respondents know a

little, 108% respondents know something, 111% of the respondents know well

and 41% of the respondents know very well. By taking average of the all scales it

can be said that awareness regarding this type of grievance is 3.22, which is more

than ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to debentures, 22% of the respondents

do not know, 77% of the respondents know a little, 98% respondents know

something, 112% of the respondents know well and 35% of the respondents know

very well. By taking average of the all scales it can be said that awareness

regarding this type of grievance is 3.18, which is more than ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to Non-receipt of letter of offer for

rights, 31% of the respondents do not know, 88% of the respondents know a little,

90% respondents know something, 95% of the respondents know well and 40% of

the respondents know very well. By taking average of the all scales it can be

said that awareness regarding this type of grievance is 3.07, which is more than

‘know something’.


255

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to Collective Investment Schemes,





something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to Collective Investment Schemes,





something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to Mutual Funds/ Venture Capital

Funds/ Foreign Venture Capital Investors/ Foreign Institutional Investors/

Portfolio Managers, Custodians, 58% of the respondents do not know, 90% of the



average of the all scales it can be said that awareness regarding this type of

grievance is 2.74, which is nearer to ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to Brokers/ Securities Lending

Intermediaries/ Merchant Bankers/ Registrars and Transfer Agents/ Debenture

Trustees/ Bankers to Issue/ Underwriters/ Credit Rating Agencies/ Depository

Participants. 52% of the respondents do not know, 96% of the respondents know a



be said that awareness regarding this type of grievance is 2.69, which is in nearer

to ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to Securities Exchanges/ Clearing and

Settlement Organizations/ Depositories. 64% of the respondents do not know,


256

86% of the respondents know a little, 113% respondents know something, 60% of

the respondents know well and 21% of the respondents know very well. By taking


grievance is 2.67 which is in nearer to ‘know something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to Derivative Trading, 56% of the




awareness regarding this type of grievance is 2.75 which is in nearer to ‘know

something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to Derivative Trading, 56% of the




awareness regarding this type of grievance is 2.75 which is in nearer to ‘know

something’.

Overall state wise, for the grievance related to Corporate Governance/ Corporate

Restructuring/ Substantial Acquisition and Takeovers/ Buyback / Delisting /

Compliance With Listing Conditions, 71% of the respondents do not know, 88%

of the respondents know a little, 111% respondents know something, 50% of the



grievance is 2.62 which is in nearer to ‘know something’.

chapter 8 summary and findingsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/31697/16/16...the fifth...

Documents