SHRIKANT G MANTI Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Opposite party moved an application and submitted that complainant filed complaint against the opposite party alleging deficiency of service by not returning the pledged 3,75,000 shares of ITC Ltd. though, in fact, shares were never pledged by the complainant against the overdraft facility but were given as security in the Arbitrage account. It was further submitted that in this matter issues are still to be framed and as counter reply has been filed by the complainant and evidence by way of affidavit has been filed by the parties, and written arguments are to be filed by the opposite party, opposite party may be permitted to cross-examine complainant as he has made contradictory averments in the complaint, written letters and submissions in various cases before courts.

(2.) Complainant filed reply to this application and submitted that opposite party's contention regarding pledge of shares for arbitrage portfolio has been rejected by the Arbitrator, Appellate Authorities and also by Hon'ble Apex Court. Complainant filed evidence by way of affidavit in the year 2006 and opposite party also filed affidavit by way of evidence without making any request for cross-examination of parties, hence, this application which has been filed only with an intention to delay the hearing of the case may be rejected. Opposite party was directed to file written submissions but instead of complying with the directions given by this Commission, he has moved this belated application for the purpose of confusing Commission and delaying disposal of complaint, hence, application deserves to be dismissed with exemplary cost.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused record.