Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Central Information Commission

Mr. Mahesh Belwal vs State Bank Of India on 19 August, 2008

       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                                 Appeal No.2720/ICPB/2008
                                                      F. No. PBA/2008/384
                                                           August 19, 2008

        In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 19

Appellant:       Mr. Mahesh Belwal

Public Authority: State Bank of India
                  GM & CPIO
                  CGM & Appellate Authority
FACTS:

The appellant is the Managing Director of Belwal Spinning Mills Ltd. The company owed a debt of over Rs.1 crore to the bank. The bank had assigned the debt to M/S Kotak Mahendra Bank Ltd. By an application dated 27.10.2007, the appellant desired the information as to the amount for which the debt had been assigned to Kotak Mahendra Bank. By a letter dated 19.11.2007, the CPIO declined to furnish the information applying the provisions of Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act. On appeal, observing that the information sought was in the nature of commercial confidence, the disclosure of which will harm the competition position of Kotak Mahendra Bank Ltd the AA upheld the decision of the CPIO. He had also relied on the decision of this Commission in case No.477/IC(A)/2007- Manish Singh Vs. SBI wherein this Commission had upheld the decision of the bank to decline to furnish similar information. Hence the present appeal. In the comments, it is stated that if the information sought is furnished, in case of further assignment of similar debts, the prospective purchaser of the debts would quote less price by knowing the earlier price of assignment of debts and therefore the disclosure would affect the competitive position in the market and accordingly application of the provisions of Section 8(1)(d) of the Act is justifiable.

DECISION:

I agree with the CPIO and the AA that disclosure of the agreement between Kotak Mahendra and SBI is covered under the exempted provisions of Section 8(1)(d) of the Act. A similar decision has been given by me in Appeal No.858/ICPB/2007- Rajesh Parekh Vs. SBI. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
1
Let a copy of this decision be sent to the appellant and CPIO.
Sd/-
(Padma Balasubramanian) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy :
(Prem Singh Sagar) Under Secretary & Assistant Registrar Address of parties :
1. GM & CPIO, State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Management Group, Corporate Banking Group, State Bank Bhavan, Madame Cama Road, Post Box No. 12, Mumbai-400021
2. CGM & Appellate Authority, State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Management Group, Corporate Banking Group, State Bank Bhavan, Madame Cama Road, Post Box No. 12, Mumbai-400021
3. Mr. Belwal Spinning Mills Ltd, 4654/21, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi-110002 2