9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (10) TMI 1065X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the meaning of section 34 on which interest pendente lite and future interest i.e. post-decree interest, at such rate and for such period which the Court may deem fit, may be awarded by the Court. Let all these appeals and SLPs be now placed before appropriate Bench for decision. - SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 2421 OF 1993 - - - Dated:- 18-10-2001 - DR. A.S. ANAND, CHIEF JUSTICE K.T. THOMAS, R.C. LAHOTI, N. SANTOSH HEGDE AND S.N. VARIAVA, JJ. Harish N. Salve, Rakesh Dwivedi, K.N. Bhat, Ranjit Kumar, J.B. Dadananji Co., Janendra Lal, Yasmin Tarapore, Siddharth Goswami, Siddharth Choudhary, Aprajita Singh, Gayatri Goswami, Prikesh Kapoor, B.R. Narang, Amit P. Deshpande, Balraj Dewan, V. Sudeer, Ugra Shankar Prasad, Rajiv Kapur, Ms. Shubhra Kapur, Sanjay Kapur, R.K. Kapoor, P. Varma, Anis Ahmed Khan, M.K. Dua, Nina Gupta, Uday Gupta, Arpita Mahajan, Vineet Kumar, K.M.K. Nair, A. Subba Rao, Varun Goswami, R.C. Verma, Mukesh Verma, Madhu Moolchandani, Sushma Manchanda, Dhruv Mehta, Shobha, Anu Mehta, S.K. Mehta, Manoj Swarup, K.R. Nagarja and Shivaji M. Jadhav for the appearing parties. JUDGMENT Lahoti, J. What is the meaning to be assigned to the phras ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for constituting the Constitution Bench." (p. 279) Section 34(1) of Code of Civil Procedure and 1956 Amendment 3. Sub-section (1) of section 34 above said, as it stood prior to the 1956 amendment, and as it stands amended, are reproduced in juxta position hereunder : " Prior to amendment As amended by Act No. 66 of 1956 34. Interest. (1) Where and in so far as a decree is for the payment of money, the Court may, in the decree, order interest at such rate as the Court deems reasonable to be paid on the principal sum adjudged, from the date of the suit to the date of the decree, in addition to any interest adjudged on such principal sum for any period prior to the institution of the suit, with further interest at such rate as the Court deems reasonable on the aggregate sum so adjudged, from the date of the decree to the date of payment, or to such earlier date as the Court thinks fit. Interest. (1) Where and in so far as a decree is for the payment of money, the Court may, in the decree, order interest at such rate as the Court deems reasonable to be paid on the principal sum adjudged, from the date of the suit to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the parties) to decide only the question of law posed for decision and leave the individual cases to be decided by appropriate Bench consistently with the law laid down by the Constitution Bench, we are relieved of the need of noticing facts of individual cases. Suffice it, for our purpose, to notice in very brief, by way of illustration, the facts of Ravindra s case ( supra ) to demonstrate the nature of controversy. The petitioner bank sanctioned a loan to the respondent No. 1 on the guarantee of respondent Nos. 2 and 3. On 21-6-1979, the respondent No. 1 executed a demand promissory note for Rs. 1,37,720 and also executed term agreement of hypothecation of the vehicle. The loan carried interest at the rate of 11 per cent per annum with quarterly rests as on 31st March, 30th June, 30th September and 31st December every year. The total outstanding, inclusive of the interest charged as per agreement, was Rs. 1,51,825 on the date of the suit for the recovery whereof the suit was filed by the petitioner bank. Relief was also prayed for the grant of interest pendente lite and future interest till realisation. The trial court passed a decree for Rs. 1,51,825 with future interes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting the same before the Court. However, he insistently pressed and pursued the second one, i.e., the narrower submission that the principal sum adjudged would include all sums as are due under the contract between the parties and have stood capitalised with the amount actually disbursed to the borrower. The amalgam - an intimate mixture - would be adjudged as the principal sum and would not permit any attempt at unscrambling. Developing the narrower argument further, the learned Solicitor General submitted that the contract between the parties or an established bank practice (in the case of banking transactions) may provide for the interest on periodical rests being compounded and capitalised with the principal, in which event, the amount debited in the account of the borrower shall shed its character as interest and become the principal on being capitalised and therefore shall have to be adjudged as the principal sum on the date of the suit. The contract or established banking practice shall govern the relationship between the parties and bind the Court. The Court will not reopen the account so as to separate from the amalgam - the interest charged and the sums actually adv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest, if any , adjudged on such principal sum . The learned Solicitor General went on to submit that the 1956 amendment does not have any bearing on the meaning of words the principal sum adjudged which remains the same pre and post 1956. The 1956 amendment, which has substituted the words on such principal sum for the words on the aggregate sum so adjudged has only this effect that prior to the amendment future interest was capable of being awarded on the aggregate of three components taken together, i.e., ( 1 ) the principal sum (so adjudged), ( 2 ) pre-suit interest (so adjudged), and ( 3 ) decretal costs. By virtue of 1956 amendment, the amount of interest adjudged as interest on the date of the suit and decretal costs cannot be ordered to carry future interest, but the amount adjudged as principal sum though inclusive of interest which has stood capitalised and has partaken character of principal by virtue of contract or banking practice, is capable of bearing future interest because it will be the principal sum adjudged . 10. Shri Ranjit Kumar, Senior Advocate, the learned amicus as also the other learned counsel appearing for the debtors have submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ys keep such accounts, balancing the account at the end of the year, and, in the event of the interest accruing during the past year not being otherwise paid or provided for, placing the amount of such interest as the last item to the debit of the account, and accumulating such interest along with the principal sum due on the account, and bringing down the balance thus ascertained, consisting partly of principal, and partly of interest, to the new account for the ensuing year, and placing the accumulated balance as the first article of debit in that new account. Where an account is kept in this way consistently throughout its whole course, the interest thus accumulated with principal, at the end of each year not only becomes principal, but never thereafter ceases to be dealt with as principal." (p. 236) "The privilege of a banker to balance the account at the end of the year, and accumulate the interest with the principal, is founded on this plain ground of equity, that the interest ought then to be paid, and, because it is not paid, the debtor becomes thenceforth debtor in the amount, as a principal sum itself bearing interest. This principal of equity must be consistently carri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emed to have paid each half year the accruing interest by means of an advance made for this purpose by the bank to the company. 14. Holder v. IRC [1932] All E.R. 265 and Paton (Fenton s Trustee) v. IRC [1938] All E.R. 786, are cases under the Income-tax Law. In Holder s case ( supra ) it was held that in view of the bank s practice of adding the interest each half-year to the amount advanced, the interest was in effect paid each half year to the bank by means of advances made for that purpose by the bank to the customer and for this reason no part of payment (later) made by the tax payer was payment of interest and hence the tax payer was not entitled to the relief claimed. In Paton (Fenton s Trustee) case ( supra ) each half year interest at an agreed rate, and without deduction of tax, was placed to the debit of the account of the borrower and the aggregate amount was then treated as principal for the following half year. Question arose, whether the interest in question which was capitalised could be said to have been in fact paid by the borrower so as to attract applicability to him of certain beneficial provision of the Income-tax Act, 1918? Lord Atkin opined - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sage of bankers, that the bank was entitled to capitalise interest, which in the case before their Lordships, was at quarterly rests (by concession) and that such entitlement continued until judgment. Lloyd LJ opined that an implied agreement to pay compound interest with quarterly rest based on the banking practice exists during the currency of the banker customer relationship but once the banker-customer relationship ceases the bank cannot charge compound interest and only simple interest would be payable. His Lordship traced the history of banking practice as borne out by judicial precedents, and held: "( i ) There is no right to compound interest save by agreement, express or implied, or custom binding on the parties; ( ii ) there was no express agreement to pay compound interest in the present case; ( iii ) an agreement to pay compound interest may be implied by virtue of acquiescence ( Lord Clancarty v. Latouche ); but ( iv ) such an agreement is not normally implied except as to "mercantile accounts current for mutual transactions" ( Deutsche Bank v. Banque des Marchands de Moscou 4 L.D.B. 293, 296, per Greer L.J.; ( v ) it is open to question whether the agreement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... includes the payment of interest as an acknowledged debt this is not in principle open to any sound objection. Their Lordships referred to the decision of the Court of Appeal in Lyle v. Chappel [1932] 1 KB 691, speech of Lord Atkin in Paton v. IRC 1938 AC 341, decision of Channel, J, in Carrington Ltd. v. Smith [1906] 1 KB 79, and the decision by the Court of Appeal in Reading Trust v. Spero [1930] 1 KB 492, and held that a willing and intelligent borrower had agreed to the interest charged is one of the circumstances to be taken into account though not conclusive. Their Lordships upheld the charge of 15 per cent interest payable on the sums from time to time acknowledged to be owing by the borrowers to the lenders and thus allowing interest on interest. However, interest charged @ 24 per cent on the loan and charges which were amply secured by charges on rubber estate which had been well looked after and kept in good order was held unreasonable, excessive and unfair. The fact remains that Their Lordships approved charging of interest @ 15 per cent and capitalisation of the same by means of acknowledgement to that effect by the borrowers and also upheld permissibil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the bank. The Division Bench noted that according to the usage prevailing between bankers and customers it is an implied term of their dealing that the banker is to be treated as having made an advance to the customer at the end of each year or half year, as the case may be, of a sum equivalent in amount to the interest accruing during that period, so as to enable the customer to discharge the interest, increasing the principal of his debt by a corresponding amount. It was urged that the periodical settlement of accounts evidenced by the borrower s letters of acknowledgement were renewals and only the sums advanced as principal were repayable notwithstanding its capitalisation of interest from time to time; the interest being still treated as interest and wiped out. The Division Bench speaking through Patanjali Sastri, J. (as his Lordships then was) noted that if the effect of the mode of dealing adopted between banker and customer is, according to the long standing usage governing their relations, to treat the interest accruing in any year as discharged by a borrowing of an equivalent sum from the bank "in precisely the same way as, if the customer had given the bank a cheque u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erest till the date of the suit. It was held that the effect of the agreement was to wipe off all interest outstanding at the end of each quarter by means of further advances from the bank of similar amounts which are debited to the account of the debtor. It was further held that the interest that thus accumulated with principal at the end of each quarter became principal and never thereafter ceased to be dealt with as principal. The amount due on 31-12-1952 in the account was treated as the principal amount outstanding on 1-11-1953. However in passing the Full Bench noted that the position may have been different if under a local debt relief law it was subsequently provided that the principal would mean the amount originally advanced together with sum, if any, subsequently advanced, notwithstanding any stipulation to treat any interest as principal. 22. In K. Appa Rao v. V.L. Varadaraj AIR 1981 Mad. 94, the Division Bench, speaking through Nainar Sundram, J., pointed out that the charging of compound interest by itself is not per se usurious except in the case of an agriculturist protected by the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 as amended in its application in Madras. However, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rower s application under Order 6 rule 5 seeking direction to the bank to point out separately by breaking up its claim so as to show the amount of the principal and the interest separately, it was held that the principal amount found due not only means the principal amount but also the amount due as interest which has become part of the principal. 26. In Nedungadi Bank Ltd. v. Aswathi Starch Glucose (P.) Ltd. AIR 1996 Ker. 112, K.G. Balakrishnan, J. (as his Lordship then was), speaking for the Division Bench, held that the expression principal sum adjudged used in section 34 indicates that it is not the original principal amount but it could be an amount so adjudged as principal. If, as per the contract between the parties, interest also is to be treated as principal, the amount so adjudged is to be taken as principal for granting future interest. 27. In State Bank of India v. Smt. Neela Ashok Naik AIR 2000 Bom. 151, Y.K. Sabharwal, C.J. (as his Lordship then was) speaking for the Division Bench, dealing with section 34, held that legal position clearly was that the principal sum adjudged can include in it interest as well, depending upon the contract between ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d interest in any other manner, from a borrower who has obtained a loan or an advance for agricultural/commercial purposes, as the case may be ? During the course of its judgment the Court observed ( vide para 14): ". . . .charging of interest with periodical rests or compounding of interest would be allowed if there is evidence of the customer having acquiesced therein, provided the relation of banker and customer is subsisting. However, if the relationship undergoes a change into that of mortgagee and mortgagor by the taking of a mortgage, the charging of interest would be governed in accordance with the terms of the mortgage. The taking of a mortgage to secure the fluctuating balance of an overdrawn account, being not inconsistent with the relationship of banker and customer, would not displace an earlier right to charge compound interest. Thus, the practice of bankers to debit the accrued interest to the borrower s current account at regular periods is a recognised practice." 30. Their Lordships cited with approval the following passage from Halsbury s Laws of England (4th Edition) (Vol. 3, at page 118, para 160): "160. Interest By the universal custom of bankers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch decision of this Court in Corpn. Bank s case ( supra ). Therein the sum borrowed by the debtor was Rs. 1,20,675.59 to which compound interest was added and a suit to recover a sum of Rs. 1,66,759.29 with interest was filed claiming that the interest charged and added to the sum borrowed would be the principal sum adjudged on which future interest could be granted under section 34. This plea found favour with the Trial Judge. On appeal the High Court modified the decree by directing that future interest should be calculated on the sum borrowed viz. Rs. 1,20,675.59 and not the principal sum adjudged i.e. Rs. 1,66,759.29. This Court set aside the appellate judgment of the High Court and restored the decree passed by the Trial Judge. 33. In Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. v. General Electric Co. [1994] Suppl. (1) SCC 644, a three-Judges Bench of this Court has noted the practice of charging interest as prevalent in Australia, Canada and India and held that compound interest can be awarded by Courts in India when justice so demands and is not to be regarded as being against public policy. The Court noted that it is a common knowledge that provision is made for the payment of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sis is itself incorrect as we have dealt with. The Full Bench dissented from the view taken by a number of High Courts and chose to follow a Division Bench decision of that very High Court in the case of Jagannath Pigment Chemicals ( supra ) [See - (1996) 5 SCC 279] which has been reversed by this Court D.S. Gowda s case ( supra ) of Karnataka High Court was also reversed by this Court. Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Punjab High Court decisions cited by the learned amicus , are based on Bombay High Court Full Bench view. In I.K. Merchants Ltd. s case ( supra ), the learned single Judge of Calcutta High Court has not approved interest being awarded on the sum adjudged as interest for the pre-suit period (See, Para 31 of the Report). To the same effect is the Division Bench decision of Gujarat High Court in Gujarat Agro Oil Enterprises Ltd. s case ( supra ). These two decisions have no relevance to the issue before us. Conclusion which follows 36. The English decisions and the decisions of this Court and almost all the High Courts of the country have noticed and approved long established banking practice of charging interest at reasonable rate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not that use. The general idea is that he is entitled to compensation for the deprivation; the money due to creditor was not paid, or, in other words, was withheld from him by the debtor after the time when payment should have been made, in breach of his legal rights, and interest was a compensation whether the compensation was liquidated under an agreement or statute. A Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab speaking through Tek Chand, J. in CIT v. Dr. Sham Lal Narula AIR 1963 Punj. 411 thus articulated the concept of interest "the words interest and compensation are sometimes used interchangeably and on other occasions they have distinct connotation. Interest in general terms is the return or compensation for the use or retention by one person of a sum of money belonging to or owed to another. In its narrow sense, interest is understood to mean the amount which one has contracted to pay for use of borrowed money.... In whatever category interest in a particular case may be put, it is a consideration paid either for the use of money or for forbearance in demanding it, after it has fallen due, and thus, it is a charge for the use or forbearance of money. In this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er debt law governing the parties and having an overriding effect on any stipulation for payment of interest voluntarily entered into between the parties; ( ii ) if the rate is penal, the Court must award at such rate as it deems reasonable; ( iii ) even if the rate is not penal the Court may reduce it if the interest is excessive and the transaction was substantially unfair. If there is no express stipulation for payment of interest the plaintiff is not entitled to interest except on proof of mercantile usage, statutory right to interest, or an implied agreement. Interest from the date of suit to date of decree is in the discretion of the Court. Interest from the date of the decree to the date of payment or any other earlier date appointed by the Court is again in the discretion of the Court - to award or not to award as also the rate at which to award. These principles are well established and are not disputed by the learned counsel for the parties. We have stated the same only by way of introduction to the main controversy before us which has a colour little different and somewhat complex. The learned counsels appearing before us are agreed that pre-suit interest is a matter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch earlier date as the Court thinks fit. Shortly hereinafter we propose to give an indication of the circumstances in which the Court may decline award of interest or may award interest at a rate lesser than the permissible rate. 42. It was submitted by the learned amicus and other counsel for the borrowers, that the expression on such principal sum as occurring twice in the latter part of section 34(1), which refers to interest pendente lite and post-decree, should be interpreted to mean principal sum arrived at by excluding the interest even if it has stood capitalised. This would be consistent with the legislative intent as reflected in the report of Joint Committee and sought to be fulfilled by 1956 amendment. For two reasons this contention has to be rejected. Firstly, entertaining such a plea amounts to begging the question. As we have already held that the interest once capitalised ceases to be interest and becomes a part of principal sum or capital. That being so the interest forming amalgam with the principal, in view of having been capitalized, is principal sum and, therefore, the question of awarding interest on interest does not arise at all. Secondly, well-se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mentioned (used to avoid repetition of one word twice in a sentence); that part of something just stated or about to be stated." Thus, generally speaking, the use of the word such as an adjective prefixed to a noun is indicative of the draftsman s intention that he is assigning the same meaning or characteristic to the noun as has been previously indicated or that he is referring to something which has been said before. This principle has all the more vigorous application when the two places employing the same expression, at earlier place the expression having been defined or characterised and at the latter place having been qualified by use of the word such , are situated in close proximity. 44. We are of the opinion that the meaning assigned to the expression the principal sum adjudged should continue to be assigned to principal sum at such other places in section 34(1) where the expression has been used qualified by the adjective such , that is to say, as such principal sum . Recognition of the method of capitalisation of interest so as to make it a part of the principal consistently with the contract between the parties or established banking practice does not offe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (to wit, see Prabirendra Mohan v. Berhampore Bank Ltd. AIR 1954 Cal. 289, 295) that aggregate sum contemplated the aggregate of ( i ) the principal sum adjudged, ( ii ) the interest from the date of the suit to the date of decree, and ( iii ) the pre-suit interest. Future interest was capable of being awarded also on the amount of pre-suit interest - adjudged as such, that is, away from such interest as was adjudged as principal sum having amalgamated into it by virtue of capitalisation. The amendment is intended to deprive the court of its pre-amendment power to award interest on interest i.e. interest on interest adjudged as such. The amendment cannot be read as intending, expressly or by necessary implication, to deprive the court of its power to award future interest on the amount of the principal sum adjudged, the sense in which the expression was understood, also judicially expounded even before 1955; the expression having been left untouched by the 1956 amendment. 46. It was submitted from borrowers side that such an interpretation of section 34 as canvassed on behalf of the banks, if accepted, may result in anomalous situations emerging. To wit, it was pointed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of interest, and the other, not permitting the same. There may be a case, as was D.S. Gowda s case ( supra ) decided by this Court, wherein interest is capitalised with quarterly rests on a particular date, say, 31st March and so on and the suit is filed before the date on which interest will be capitalised. The amount of interest charged for the period of time less than the quarter would remain an interest, not capitalised. Then there may be a case where interest may have been charged and capitalised at a rate exceeding the one permitted in which case the amount of interest charged and capitalised beyond the quantum permissible shall have to be separated. In all such cases the principal sum inclusive of capitalised interest to the extent permissible shall be adjudged as principal sum and there would also be in addition any interest adjudged by way of interest on such principal sum for the pre-suit period. We, therefore, find force in the submission of the learned solicitor general that in that part of section 34(1) which speaks of "interest adjudged on such principal sum" for pre-suit period, the text should be read as if by reading "interest" qualified by if any so a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 35A also empowers Reserve Bank of India in the public interest or in the interest of banking policy or in the interests of depositors (and so on) to issue directions generally or in particular which shall be binding. With effect from 15-2-1984, section 21A has been inserted in the Act which takes away power of the Court to re-open a transaction between a banking company and its debtor on the ground that the rate of interest charged is excessive. The provision has been given an overriding effect over the Usury Loans Act, 1918 and any other provincial law in force relating to indebtedness. 52. This Court held in D.S. Gowda s case ( supra ) that the directions issued by the Reserve Bank of India have statutory flavour. The Court noted that agricultural finance stands on a different footing for the reason that agriculturists do not have any regular source of income other than the sale proceeds of their crops and therefore agricultural loans have to be treated differently from other loans and borrowings. Reserve Bank of India has also shown its concern towards agriculturist loanees by devising separate policy to govern them and not permitting capitalisation of accrued int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest with periodical rests, the bank could not have charged the same. 55. During the course of hearing it was brought to our notice that in view of several Usury Laws and Debt Relief Laws in force in several States private money lending has almost come to an end and needy borrowers by and large depend on banking institutions for financial facilities. Several unhealthy practices having slowly penetrated into prevalence were pointed out. Banking is an organised institution and most of the banks press into service long running documents wherein the borrowers fill in the blanks, at times without caring to read what has been provided therein, and bind themselves by the stipulations articulated by best of legal brains. Borrowers other than those belonging to corporate sector, find themselves having unwittingly fallen into a trap and rendered themselves liable and obliged to pay interest the quantum whereof may at the end prove to be ruinous. At times the interest charged and capitalised is manifold than the amount actually advanced. Rule of damdupat does not apply. Penal interest, service charges and other over-heads are debited in the account of the borrower and capitalised o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... talisation method is founded on the principle that the borrower failed to make payment though he could have made and thereby rendered himself a defaulter. To hold an amount debited to the account of the borrower capitalised it should appear that the borrower had an opportunity of making the payment on the date of entry or within a reasonable time or period of grace from the date of debit entry or the amount falling due and thereby avoiding capitalisation. Any debit entry in the account of the borrower and claimed to have been capitalised so as to form an amalgam of the principal sum may be excluded on being shown to the satisfaction of the Court that such debit entry was not brought to the notice of the borrower and/or he did not have the opportunity of making payment before capitalisation and thereby excluding its capitalisation. ( 5 ) The power conferred by sections 21 and 35A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1935 is coupled with duty to act. Reserve Bank of India is prime banking institution of the country entrusted with a supervisory role over banking and conferred with the authority of issuing binding directions, having statutory force, in the interest of public in general and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd interest has been charged at such rates, and captialised at such periodical rests, as are permitted by, and do not run counter to, the directives of the Reserve Bank of India. A statement of account shall be filed in Court showing details and giving particulars of debit entries, and if debit entry relates to interest then setting out also the rate of, and the period for which, the interest has been charged. On the Court being prima facie satisfied, if a dispute is raised in that regard, of the permissibility of debits, the onus would be on the borrower to show why the amount of debit balance appearing at the foot of the account and claimed as principal sum cannot be so accepted and adjudged. This practice would narrow down the scope of controversy in suits filed by banking institutions and enable an expeditious disposal of the suits, the issues wherein are by and large capable of being determined by documentary evidence. RBI directives have not only statutory flavour, any contravention thereof or any default in compliance therewith is punishable under sub-section (4) of section 46 of Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The Court can act on assumption that transactions or dealings ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
