Judgment

Kirpal, J.-The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of the High Court which, while allowing the appeal filed by the respondent, had declared Section 21-A of the Banking Companies Regulation Act as being ultra vires.

2. Briefly stated the facts are that a suit for recovery of money was filed by the appellant before the District Munsif, Eluru. The trial court passed a preliminary decree and the same was substantially upheld by the District Court.

3. In the second appeal which was filed, one of the contentions which was raised related to the charging of interest by the appellant. After the decree of the trial Court, by the Banking Laws (Amendment) Act 1 of 1984, new Section 21-A was inserted in the Banking Companies Regu­lation Act. The said Section reads as follows :

“Notwithstanding anything contained in the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 or any other law relating to indebtedness in force in any State, a transac­tion between a banking company and its debtor shall not be reopened by any court on the ground that the rate of interest charged by the banking company in respect of such transaction is excessive.”

4. Relying upon the provision, the contention of the appellant was that