SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

V.K.JAIN
Renuka Poultry Farm – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Anil V. Katarki, Advocate

ORDER (ORAL)

V.K. Jain, Presiding Member.—The complainant which is a partnership firm, and is running a poultry farm, was sanctioned loans worth Rs.9.98 crore under different heads. The case of the complainant is that the loan accounts ought to have been renewed after one year but that was not done. The respondent debited a sum of Rs.1611921/- in the account of the complainant towards recovery of short interest. The case of the complainant is that the respondent had recovered excess interest from it for the period from 18.09.2013 to 20.06.2014 without intimating the hike in the interest rate to the complainant. The complainant, therefore, approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint.

2. The complaint was resisted by the respondent which took a preliminary objection that the complainant was not a ‘consumer’ within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

3. On merits also the respondent disputed the case set out by the complainant.

4. The District Forum having allowed the consumer complaint and having held that the complainant was entitled to recover excess interest paid to the bank for the above-referred period, the respondent bank approached the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top