ALLAHABAD BANK Vs. RAVINDRA FLOUR MILL PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was the opposite party. respondent No. 2/complainant No. 2, owner of respondent No. 1/complainant No. 1 had obtained cash credit limit of Rs. 60 lakh in 1999 from the petitioner bank. Respondents returned the amount due in the account on 9. 3. 2000 and asked the petitioner to issue 'no Dues Certificate'. It was alleged that from the copy of statement of account supplied by the petitioner, the respondents learnt that an amount of Rs. 19,713 had been charged by the bank towards penal interest @ 2%. Seeking refund of that amount the respondents filed complaint which was contested by the petitioner. The District Forum allowed the complaint with direction to the petitioner to refund the said amount of Rs. 19,713 to the respondents. Appeal against District Forum's order filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the State Commission vide order letter dated 2. 12. 2004. It is this order which is being callenged in this revision.

(2.) MR. Bikas Kar Gupta for petitioner contends that amount in question was charged towards penal interest on basis of instructions contained in Circular No. 3229 dated 9. 12. 1999. On inquiry if before charging the amount in question a copy of that circular was supplied to the respondents and/or a notice sent to the respondents drawing their attention to the cirular, Mr. Gupta has answered in negative. In our view, in absence of supplying copy of said circular and/or drawing attention of the respondents through notice/letter thereto the petitioner bank was not legally entitled to charge penal interest at the said rate from the respondents.

(3.) THERE is no illegality or jurisdictional error in the order passed by Fora below warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21 (b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. Revision Petitions dismissed.