Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

M/s. Megma Fincrop Ltd v. Bidami Devi Malu

M/s. Megma Fincrop Ltd v. Bidami Devi Malu

(National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi)

Revision Petition No. 1111/2010 | 13-04-2016

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The representative of the petitioner company, namely, Shri Ved Prakash is also present. I find no justification for levying late payment charges @ 3% per month over and above interest @ 14.01 p.a. Since there is no proof of the bank of the petitioner having recovered any cheque return charges from the petitioner, there is no justification for the petitioner claiming bank returning charges from the complainant. It is stated by the representative of the petitioner company that they have received a total payment of Rs.1,70,586/- from the complainant as against the total principal loan amount of Rs.1,30,000/-.

2. The revision petition is therefore disposed of with the following directions: (a) The petitioner company, taking the loan amount at Rs.1,30,000/- shall calculate the balance amount payable by the complainant, adding only simple interest @ 14.01% p.a. on the principal amount of Rs.1,30,000/- borrowed by the complainant. -1- (b) The amount of Rs.1,70,586/- paid by the complainant shall be deducted from the amount so workout. (c) The balance amount if any found payable to the petitioner company shall be communicated to the complainant within four weeks from today. The complainant shall pay that amount within four weeks thereafter. (d) The requisite NOC shall be issued by the petitioner company within two weeks of the complainant making payment in terms of this order. It is made clear that while computing simple interest in terms of this order, the computation shall be made on reducing balance only. ......................J V.K. JAIN PRESIDING MEMBER

Advocate List
Bench
  • MR. V.K. JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER
Eq Citations
  • LQ/NCDRC/2016/66
Head Note

CONSUMER PROTECTION — Lending and Hire-Purchase — Money Lending — Interest — Late payment charges — No justification for levying late payment charges @ 3% per month over and above interest @ 14.01 p.a. — Bank returning charges — No justification for petitioner claiming bank returning charges from complainant