Andhra Bank Vs. Inturi Narayana and ors. - Court Judgment |
| SooperKanoon Citation | sooperkanoon.com/438413 |
| Subject | Banking |
| Court | Andhra Pradesh High Court |
| Decided On | Sep-25-1997 |
| Case Number | Appeal No. 1879 of 1985 |
| Judge | C.V.N. Sastri, J. |
| Reported in | 1997(6)ALT392 |
| Acts | Banking Regulation Act, 1949 - Sections 21A; Banking Regulation (Amendment) Act, 1984 |
| Appellant | Andhra Bank |
| Respondent | inturi Narayana and ors. |
| Appellant Advocate | M.R. Reddy, Adv. |
| Respondent Advocate | G. Rama Rao, Adv. for Respondent No. 1 |
| Disposition | Appeal allowed |
Excerpt:
.....is only supplemental and not the alternative mode of giving notice to persons whose names are entered in the record of rights. if legislature thought that publication of a general notice in form viii will be sufficient compliance of rules of natural justice, then there was no occasion to incorporate a specific requirement of issuing written notice to persons whose names are entered in the record of rights and who are interested in or affected by the amendment. the requirement of issuing written notice to such persons clearly negates the argument that publication of notice in form vii is sufficient. thus the language of form viii in which notice is required to be published cannot control the interpretation of substantive provision contained in section 5((3), which casts a duty on..........whether the transaction was entered into prior to its commencement or after and that section 21-a applies to pending appeals irrespective of the fact whether a decree was passed giving relief to the debtot or not. it was also held that section 21-a makes no distinction between an advance made for agricultural purpose or for commercial purpose and it equally applies to both. it was further held that the provisions of usurious loans act, 1918 (act 10 of 1918) as amended by usurious loans 25 (madras amendment) act 8 of 1936 section 3 and madras agriculturists debt relief act, 1938 (act iv of 1938) were not applicable to the advances made by banks to agriculturists.2. in view of the said full bench judgment the appeal is allowed and the suit is decreed with costs as prayed for. but in the.....
Judgment:C.V.N. Sastri, J.
1. This appeal filed by the Andhra Bank, Plaintiff in the suit, relates to the question of interest only. While decreeing the suit, the trial Court scaled down the interest as per Act IV of 1938 on the ground that the defendants are agriculturists. It is the settled position that after the introduction of Section 21-A in the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 by amending Act 1 of 1984 Courts have no power to scale down the interest in respect of debts due to Banks. A Full Bench of this Court in State Bank of Hyderabad v. Advath Sakru, 1993 (1) An.W.R. 380 .considered this question elaborately and held that Section 21-A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies to all transactions entered into between the banking company and its debtor whether the transaction was entered into prior to its commencement or after and that Section 21-A applies to pending appeals irrespective of the fact whether a decree was passed giving relief to the debtot or not. It was also held that Section 21-A makes no distinction between an advance made for agricultural purpose or for commercial purpose and it equally applies to both. It was further held that the provisions of Usurious Loans Act, 1918 (Act 10 of 1918) as amended by Usurious Loans 25 (Madras Amendment) Act 8 of 1936 Section 3 and Madras Agriculturists Debt Relief Act, 1938 (Act IV of 1938) were not applicable to the advances made by banks to agriculturists.
2. In view of the said Full Bench judgment the appeal is allowed and the suit is decreed with costs as prayed for. But in the appeal each party to bear its own costs.