Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.22 seconds)Section 74 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Manekchand Mohanlal Poonawala vs Shah Bhimji Kundanmal And Company on 13 November, 1968
Other Counsel have also argued. Attention was also invited to a judgment of this Court in respect of what is known as Khata Pete 'contract and how it was construed in the case of M/s. Manekchande Mohanlal Poonawala v. Shah Bhimji Kundanmal & Company, 1971(69) Bom.L.R. 370. The documentation and the agreement form which a credit card holder must sign before he is issued a card has been also been adverted to. Reference has also made to the Slip signed by the buyer i.e. the holder of the card, purchasing the goods whereby he undertakes to pay the amount. With the above background the issue now needs to be decided.
The Banking Regulation Act, 1949
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 21 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Raneegunj Coal Association Ltd. And ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 8 August, 1989
8. Considering the above, can it be said that the transaction is in the nature of a cash credit facility as contended by the defendant and as such the suit cannot be tried as a summary suit. On behalf of the defendant his learned Counsel has filed submissions to show how the grant of Cash Credit Facility and the use of a credit card are similar and/or have similar trappings. It is contended that in so far as cash credit facility the Apex Court in the case of Raneegunj Coal Association Ltd. and another v. Union of India & others, A.I.R. 1990 S.C. 1987 has held that money deposited by the banks in cash credit account would not attract any interest and that Cash credit account is in the nature of a current account and no interest is payable in the account. The question is whether the service charge is interest on the principal amount due and payable.
1