Proof of genuine share transaction failed where documentary trail and handwriting evidence did not support the alleged adjustment claim.

The Commission found that the complainants proved delivery of their shares and receipt of the sale price through confirmation memos. The opposite party's alleged adjustment based on a purported Finalysis Ltd. share transaction was rejected because the stock exchange record and supporting documents did not corroborate it, and the handwriting expert's opinion indicated that the signature on the delivery book was not genuine. The record also failed to show that the second opposite party had purchased the Finalysis shares for or on behalf of the first opposite party. The first opposite party was therefore held liable to pay the sale proceeds with interest and costs, while the claim against the second opposite party was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sale proceeds of the complainants' shares were withheld by opposite party no. 1 and whether the alleged adjustment on the basis of the Finalysis Ltd. share transaction could be upheld.

Analysis: The complainants established delivery of shares and the realisation of the sale price through confirmation memos. The alleged purchase of 25,000 Finalysis Ltd. shares was not supported by the stock exchange record or by the documentary trail relied upon by opposite party no. 1. The handwriting expert's opinion, supported by visual comparison, showed that the signature on the delivery book was not genuine, and the purported delivery transaction could not be accepted. The record also did not show that opposite party no. 2 had purchased the Finalysis shares for and on behalf of opposite party no. 1.

Conclusion: The transaction set up by opposite party no. 1 was rejected and opposite party no. 1 was held liable to pay the sale proceeds with interest and costs; the claim against opposite party no. 2 was rejected.

---