DIVISIONAL MANAGER ADVANCES SECTION II CIRCLE OFFICES CANARA BANK TEYNAMPET MADRAS Vs. ANGELINE DEVA DOSS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MATERIAL facts which arise for consideration in this Civil Revision Petition may be summarised as follows:-

(2.) WHILE the matter was pending before the Civil Court, respondents herein filed an application before the Consumer Redressal Forum, alleging that there is deficiency in service, and the rate of interest claimed is excessive. The Consumer Redressal Forum directed that the petitioners herein will be entitled to realise only the balance amount after giving credit to Rs.7,000 which the Bank promised to give as a reduction. In that proceeding before the Consumer Redressal Forum, petitioners herein challenged the jurisdiction of the Forum and also contended that there is no deficiency in service. But there was no finding regarding the same. Inspite of it, an Award was passed.

(3.) A very detailed finding was entered by the Civil Court holding that the Award of the Consumer Redressal Forum is without jurisdiction, and the plaintiff is also not bound by it. It further found that there is no finding by the Consumer Redressal Forum that there is any deficiency in service which alone gives jurisdiction to that Authority. It further found that the so-called claim of adjustment in interest was in the nature of a concession on certain conditions. Since the respondents herein did not comply with the conditions, it is their own fault and the Bank is entitled to realise other entire interest due on their account. It was further found that the Bank is entitled to contract rate of interest and granting a concession is purely a discretion of the Bank, and the Consumer Redressal Forum should not have interfered in such case. The finding was that the Award of the Tribunal was binding neither on the Civil Court nor the plaintiff. That judgment was pronounced on 30-9-1996, and that judgment has become final.