M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant.
(2.) The complainant/appellant, who was the customer of the opposite party bank, having OD Account No.687, pleding the shares owned by him, in various Companies, availed financial assistance to the extent of Rs.3 lakhs, for which, the shares were given as valuable security. The loan covered by the OD Account was discharged, periodically by sale of the shares deposited with the opposite party and further, the proper accounting will disclose that the OD Account should be treated as closed.
(3.) The complainant, by obtaining information, came to know that the Bank could have sold the shares either on 25.6.2002 or on 11.08.2006, not following the proper procedure. When the shares were pledged, that can be negotiated by dematerializing the shares, but despite repeated requests, the opposite party has not followed the formalities, for dematerializing the shares and if the shares were negotiable, the OD limit could not have exceeded, at any time. Therefore, the bank has to bear responsibility for the delay from 19.05.2000 and the consequential liability. The complainants instructions for sale of shares on 25.6.2002, were only at the instance and compulsion of the opposite party, not volunteer as required under law. The account stands closed of its own accord by operation of law and the pledged shares should have been released automatically. In this view, the sale of 580 shares of Colgate on 11.08.2006 is improper. The opposite party, without furnishing the vital document, informing the true position, has caused mental agony, loss and damage to the complainant, which should be construed, as deficiency in service. Hence, the case is filed to direct the opposite party to pay compensatory damage of Rs.5 lakhs and to return the shares sold on 25.6.2002 and 11.08.2006.;