T.M. Hassan Pillai, President— The question that is agitated before us is as to whether the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as the bank) were justified in recalling the “OCC” limit sanctioned or stopping the operation of overdraft facility sanctioned to the complainant.

2. Before stating the complainant’s case and bank’s defence justifying its action of recalling the “OCC” limit sanctioned or stopping the overdraft facility we have to first deal with the contention of the bank that the complainant is not a consumer. Supreme Court had occasion to consider such a question in Vimal Chandra Grover v. Bank of India1 and the legal position is laid down thus :

“When Bank is engaged in different types of business as mentioned in Section 6, it is apparent that when bank is granting overdraft facilities to its client which is a customer, it is providing service to him. The Act itself does not define the term “banking and as to what services a bank can provide, we can usefully refer to Section 6 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949”.

3. We have to hold that complainant as a consumer hired the service of the Bank for consideration i.e. by way of payment of interest for the overd