ALLAHABAD BANK vs GULSHAN NARANG

-THE appellant, M/s. Allahabad Bank has filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated 30.4.2003 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Udham Singh Nagar whereby the learned Forum directed the appellant to cancel the entire penal interest and to pay damages of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) along with cost of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand to the complainant).

THE brief facts of the case are that the complainant has a cash credit limit with the Bank. It is said that the rate of interest was only 14% but the Bank has charged interest @ 20.75%. THEre was also an application to down the limit to Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lacs) instead of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees two lacs fifty thousand), but it was not heard, it is (sic.) to pay more interest, it is said that a sum of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand) has been unnecessarily imposed against the complainant. THE Bank filed written statement, admitted the cash credit limit. However, it is alleged that the interest is charged according to the directions of the Reserve Bank. It was further alleged that this was a commercial transaction and the complainant is not within the definition of consumer. The complainant has given a chart of the rate. Most of the reliefs have not been granted to the complainant. However, the Forum has given relief to the complainant that penal interest may not be charged. The complainant alleged that the penal interest could also have been charged but atleast a right of hearing by notice was necessary. It was argued that reasonable opportunity to be heard is to be given in every case where any penalty is to be imposed and in the absence of reasonable opportunity, the order of penal interest cannot be sustained.

We have heard the learned Counsel to the parties and gone through the records. It was conceded position that according to the directions of the Reserve Bank, penal interest could have been charged. It was argued by the learned Counsel for the appellant that before the learned Forum, Regulations of the Reserve Bank were filed but the learned Forum did not discuss those Regulations and did not give any finding whether according to the Regulations, penal interest could have been charged or not? Secondly, it has also not been discussed in the judgment of the learned Forum whether reasonable opportunity for imposing penal interest is to be given or not? Regarding the legal plea whether the complainant is a consumer or not or whether he is excluded by the exclusion clause on the ground of commercial transactions or not, no finding whatsoever has been given. It is only written in the judgment that since the Bank has given cash credit limit, it comes within the purview of service. It is true but if the transaction is a commercial transaction, that may not come within the purview. The learned Counsel for the parties argued that the records of the case are not here, nor the Regulations are here to be discussed, therefore, the case may be remanded to the learned Forum for fresh finding on the points involved in the case. The learned Counsel for the parties argued that they have further to file evidence in the case, which the learned Forum may admit. ORDER The judgment and order dated 30.4.2003 is hereby set aside. The case is remanded to the learned Forum. The learned Forum is directed to call for the parties to lay additional evidence and to give fresh finding on each of the disputes. It shall also discuss about the plea of a commercial transaction as also about the Regulations of the Reserve Bank and then will give a definite finding. Our observations shall not be treated in any way as an expression of opinion on any of the points involved in the case. It should be decided afresh by the learned Forum on merits. Cost of the appeal shall be easy. Appeal disposed of.