SUBURBAN BANK LTD Vs. NISTARAN CHAKRABARTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff claims a sum of Rs. 1604/12/- in respect of an overdraft account. Admittedly this claim is not barred by the law of limitation. Interest on this account was charged at the rate of 12 per cent, per annum with monthly rests. The bank is not a scheduled bank. It is not alleged nor proved that the loans were commercial loans. The rate of interest being excessive the accounts must be reopened under the provisions of the Bengal Money Lenders Act. It is admitted by both parties that on such reopening and on taking accounts in accordance with the provisions of that Act only a sum of Rs. 350/- is due from the defendant to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is accordingly entitled to a decree for the sum of Rs. 350/- against the defendant in respect of this account.

(2.) The plaintiff claims another sum of Rs. 16,751/4/9 in respect of three loans of Rs. 6.000/-, Rs. 5.000/ and Rs. 1,000/-, all advanced by the plaintiff to the defendant on 27-6-1945. On the same date the defendant executed in favour of the plaintiff three promissory notes all carrying interest at the rate of 9 per cent, per annum with quarterly rests. - The plaintiff bank is now in liquidation. The winding up petition was presented on 12-5-1948 and the order for winding up was passed on 30-6-1948. The suit was instituted on 3-12-1949.

(3.) The Banking Companies Ordinance (23 of 1949) came into force on 10-9-1949. It amended . Act 10 of 1949 and inserted in it Part III-A which consists of a group of sections including Section 45F. The Banking Companies (Amendment) Act (20 of1950) came into force on 18-3-1950. It repealed Ordinance 23 of 1949 and re-enacted many of its provisions including Section 45F, Section 45F read as follows: