Back
BELA M. TRIVEDI, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
Hongkong And Shanghai Banking Corp. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Awaz – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.
1. The captioned set of appeals arise out of the common Judgment & Order dated 07.07.2008 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (hereinafter “National Commission/ NCDRC”) in Complaint Case No. 51/2007 and Revision Petition No. 1913/2004. No appeal has been preferred from either of the parties, in the Revision Petition No. 1913/2004.
2. The National Commission proceeded with the prima-facie view that the charging of interest at rates ranging from 36% to 49% p.a. is exorbitant and amounts to the exploitation of the borrowers/debtors and is usurious, had framed the following issues:
ii. (a) Whether banks can charge the credit card users interest at rates from 36% to 49% per annum if there is any delay or default in payment within the time specified?
(b) Whether interest at the above-stated rates amounts to charging usurious rates of interest?
3. The Appellants, Hong Kong Shanghai Corporation,
(1) Administrative policy decisions of Banks, do not constitute provisions/facilities of banking which may come under umbrella of ‘service’, defined under Section 2(1)(o) of Consumer Protection Act, ....
Provision of Section 24A of 1986 Act mandate observance of limitation period unless sufficient cause with a reasonable explanation is available for condoning delay to be recorded with reasons by Comm....
Commercial Purpose – The logic of a Bank providing overdraft against purchase of KVPs for commercial purpose as advanced by the appellant cannot be accepted.
Rate of Interest - the rate of interest mentioned would be the rate applicable for the duration of the ‘scheme’ and not any other rate.
Banks must adhere to RBI guidelines regarding interest rates and cannot charge excessive rates without borrower consent, ensuring transparency and fairness in lending practices.
The Banking Ombudsman must adhere to principles of natural justice, providing a fair hearing before resolving complaints, especially regarding unilateral changes in loan terms by banks.
Home Loan – When parties have signed agreement, terms agreed therein would bind parties and email exchanged between parties cannot override policy decisions of Financial Institution.
The RBI's imposition of directives under Section 35A of the Banking Regulation Act does not necessitate pre-decisional hearings, emphasizing the need for depositor protection over procedural formalit....
Dispute involving rendition of accounts & excess interest on loan between parties fell under business domain of cooperative society, requiring to be adjudicated by arbitration.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
