IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI Present: Hon’ble Thiru Justice R.SUBBIAH ... PRESIDENT Tmt. Dr. S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI ... MEMBER C.C. No.175 of 2017 Orders pronounced on: 13.01.2022 Mr.S.X.J. Vasan, I.R.S., Former Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, 11, Ayyavu Street, Ayyavu Colony, Aminjikarai, Chennai 600 029. ... Complainant Vs.

1. The Managing Director and CEO, Indian Overseas Bank, Central Office, 763, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

2. The Assistant General Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Nungambakkam Branch, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Chennai 600 034. ...Opposite Parties Counsel for Complainant : Mr.K.Sukumaran Counsel for Opposite Parties: Mr.A.Sermaraj This complaint taken up for final hearing on

27.12.2021 and, after hearing the arguments of both sides and perusing the materials on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Commission passes the following:-

O R D E R

R.Subbiah, J. - President.

The complainant has come up with the present complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as against Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 / Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai, seeking this Commission to direct the Opposite Parties to, i) pay a sum of Rs.48.77 lakh to the complainant as compensation for the loss incurred by him due to the deficiency of service and negligence committed by the opposite parties;

ii) pay a sum of Rs.25 lakh as compensation for the damage caused to the reputation and causing mental anguish and agony suffered by the complainant due to the deficient service of the opposite parties;

iii) pay a sum of Rs.25 lakh as compensation to the complainant for the consequential damage caused due to the deficient service of the opposite parties by driving away the complainant from his business activity run for his livelihood and sealing his future; and iv) pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as costs of the complaint.

2. The case of the complainant, as reflected from the Complaint, in brief, is as follows:-

Being a customer of the Opposite Parties/Bank since 1974, for the past 10 years, the complainant has been operating a Savings Bank (SB) Account at the Nungambakkam Branch/2^nd Opposite Party. His wife Mrs.Prema Malini Vasan is also maintaining an SB Account for the same period as that of the complainant with the same Branch. Both of them had invested part of their retirement benefits in Fixed Deposits (FD) with the said Branch and those Amounts had been shifted and invested in shares (Stock Market) from the year 2014 onwards for the livelihood of the complainant and his wife and the share market operations were done through the Banking channel of the Opposite Parties.

Everything went on smoothly till 19.01.2016 and an act of negligence on the part of the Opposite Parties/Bank had brought down the complainant’s investment, which was so well established after putting in lot of time and efforts, to the level of scratch. The complainant, for his livelihood, had invested about 1.5 crores by January 2016, and he was reduced to almost a pauper in the same month due to the act of negligence on the part of the Bank.

The complainant was operating S.B. A/c.

No.018301000050000 with the Second Opposite Party as Liquiflo Account with a special feature that the Amounts, over a specified time, lying in the S.B. Account of the complainant, will be automatically transferred to Term Deposit for better rate of interest and whenever situation requires, the Bank, on its own, will bring back funds from such term deposit account to the SB Account to honour the cheques issued by the complainant and for taking Demand Draft, etc. While so, in the course of stock trading, the complainant has been issuing cheques in favour of his Stock Broker - M/s.Angel Broking Private Limited, Mumbai, and received payments by RTGS to the credit of the aforesaid SB Account of the complainant. The complainant used to be allowed for higher exposure in the market on the basis of the collaterals/margin available by t