N.M.Veerappa vs Canara Bank on 27 January, 1998
9. Regarding the next alternative submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the court ought to have granted some relief in payment of the interest inasmuch as the scheme for which the loan was sanctioned was not successful. The appellant in his written statement has not taken such a plea. Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the appellant has referred a case reported in AIR 1998 SC 1101 (N.M. Veerappa v. Canara Bank) in support of his contention. In the instant case, the rate of interest or any excessiveness thereof has not been challenged or taken up in the written statement by the defendant appellant. The rate of interest charged by the Bank is not to be subject to scrutiny by the courts. This provision is incorporated in Section 21A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 Act which was inserted by Banking Law (Amendment) Act, 1984. The case cited by Mr. Chakraborty was instituted prior to the aforesaid amendment. It is not for the Court to change the rate of interest when the parties agree to it and the interest claimed by the Bank is not to be reopened on the ground that the rate of interest charged by the Bank in respect of the transaction is excessive.